Sims v. Riggins’s Empirical Analysis
1917
Citation profile
50 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently May 2017 · most notably Ivy v. Hood (1918), Bolden v. Sloss-Sheffield Steel & Iron Co. (1925)
50 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 Hale v. Kinnaird · De Soto Coal, Mining & Development Co. v. Hill · DeSota Coal Min. & Dev. Co. v. Hill · Norwood v. L. & N. Railroad
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A distinction is made between fraud, accident, mistake, and the like, relating to the subject-matter of the action, and similar elements relating to the conduct of the suit. Fraud relating to the subject-matter is not of itself sufficient ground for relief. Where it relates to the conduct of the suit, as where it prevents a party from asserting his rights, there is no fair adversary proceeding, and equity will interfere. The courts commonly speak of the former class as intrinsic, and of the latter as extrinsic, fraud, etc. Thus it is generally said that it is extrinsic fraud, mistake, and the like which are grounds for relief.” 6 Pom. Eq. Jur. p. 1092; 2 Pom. Eq. Rem. § 648.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Eskridge v. Brown““When a party is prevented from discovering the defense by the act of the opposite party, unmixed with fault or negligence on his part, ordinary diligence is excused.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Eskridge v. Brown
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.