Murchison v. Kirby’s Empirical Analysis
1961
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently January 2005
7 federal appellate · 6 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 Marco v. Dulles · Riley v. Bradley · 57 F. Supp. 680 - Otis & Co. v. Pennsylvania R. Co. · Otis & Co. v. Pennsylvania 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“this is rather a strange procedure in that the moving party seeks not a definitive relief in connection with the action to which he is a party, but rather the collateral relief of depriving plaintiffs of their counsel”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. O'Connor v. Jones“Absent a complaint by the former or present client the moving party has no status to object to the representation of the adverse party by an attorney of his choice.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Only a party who sustains a relation of client to an attorney who undertakes to represent conflicting interests may be entitled to object to such representation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Davis v. Poelman
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.