Steiner v. Stein’s Empirical Analysis
1949
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 8 district · 100 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 112 later decisions — most recently February 2018 · most notably Cogdell v. Hospital Center at Orange (1989), Shaner v. Horizon Bancorp. (1989)
3 federal appellate · 8 district · 100 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.
Relationships
Relies on 141 N.J. Eq. 379 - Mantell v. International Plastic Harmonica Corp. · Fleischer v. James Drug Stores, Inc. · Rooney v. Weeks · 129 N.J. Eq. 314 - Middlesex Concrete Products & Excavating Corp. v. Northern States Improvement Co. · Woodbridge Strong & Sons v. Mundy
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 112 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he doctrine has become such a fundamental aspect of judicial administration, it has achieved constitutional confirmation. Article 6, section 2, paragraph 4 of the 1947 Constitution states: Subject to rules of the Supreme Court, the Law Division and the Chancery Division shall each exercise the powers and functions of the other division when the ends of justice so require, and legal and equitable relief should be granted in any cause so that all matters in controversy between the parties may be completely determined.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[w]ere the trial judge in whichever division he is sitting not to hear the entire case once he has assumed jurisdiction, all of the confusion and waste of judicial effort which the framers sought to eliminate would reappear.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[W]here an action is brought which in the first instance is cognizable in the Chancery Division, it should be retained in that division irrespective of the fact that before or during the trial the equitable phases of the cause have been fully disposed of, leaving only purely legal issues remaining for determination[.]”
3 later decisions 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.