Reedy v. Gift’s Empirical Analysis
1864
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently October 1972
1 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
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.
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The plaintiff had filed a very full bill of particulars. The defendant’s motion set up many things which did not appear upon the face of the papers, any one of which, if sufficient' for a dismissal, was sufficient as a plea in bar, and could not properly be tried without proof, and, if sustained by proof, would be a complete bar to another suit for the same cause of action. We are bound to presume that the magistrate had sufficient proof to warrant the judgment he rendered. Such being the case, it must necessarily have been a trial upon the merits, no matter what it may have been called. It may have been regarded as a motion to dismiss, but it was in fact and effect a trial of the cause of action, and the judgment, although upon 'its face a judgment of dismissal, is a judgment upon the merits. It finally disposes of the cause of action set out in the bill of particulars, and would be a complete answer to another suit upon that cause of action.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.