Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 198 F.1d 618 - Lindeke v. Converse

Lindeke v. Converse’s Empirical Analysis

198 F. 618 · 1912

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
August 1940
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 3 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently August 1940

4 federal appellate · 3 district ·

401912192019301940decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Johnston v. Standard Mining Co. · Willard v. Wood · State v. Carr · In re Kuffler · Thomas v. Schwarz

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““A proceeding in bankruptcy is a proceeding in equity. The bankrupt, after a neglect to file her petition for discharge until more than 16 months after she w-as adjudged a bankrupt, and after a delay of more than 4 years and 4 months after she filed her application for a discharge, was for the first time praying the court to hear and grant it. It is an immemorial principle of equity jurisprudence that nothing but conscience, good faith, and reasonable diligence can call a court of equity into action. Smith v. Clay, 3 Brown’s Chancery, 639; State of Iowa v. Carr, 191 F. 257 , 270, 112 C. C. A. 477 . ‘It has been, frequently held,’ says the Supreme Court, ‘that the mere institution of a suit does not of itself relieve a person from the charge of laches, and that, if he fail in the diligent prosecution of the action, the consequences are the same as though no action had been begun.’ Johnston v. Standard Mining Co., 148 U. S. 360 , 370, 13 S. Ct. 585 , 589, 37 L. Ed. 480 ; Willard v. Wood, 164 U. S. 502 , 505, 17 S. Ct. 176 , 41 L. Ed. 531 . Undoubtedly it was not the intention of the Supreme Court by this statement to hold or intimate that a complainant who had commenced a suit or proceeding would be guilty of the same degree of laches as one who- had not done so. But it clearly was its purpose to declare that the institution of a legal proceeding would not relieve the actor from laches before or after its commencement. Let us try the question in this ease by these rules. Had th”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““It is obvious that a wise and just administration of this law requires that such issues shall be framed and tried before the memory of the witnesses familiar with the transactions of the bankrupt at and shortly before the time of his adjudication has been dimmed by long delay and before they and the documentary evidence surrounding these transactions have been scattered or lost. The record in this ease is so clear and compelling that the court is unable to resist the conclusion that the bankrupt failed to exercise that reasonable diligence in the- prosecution of her claim for a discharge which is requisite to call a court of equity into action in her behalf.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““The motion of the creditors was in reality an application to the court below to refuse the bankrupt a discharge on account of her lack of prosecution of her application for it. If that court had granted the motion, it would thereby have finally denied her application for her discharge. * ® * The question to be decided was a question of law, reviewable by appeal under section 25a of the Bankruptcy Law if decided against the. bankrupt and by petition to revise under section 24b of that law if decided against the creditors.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.