Phipps v. Sutherland’s Empirical Analysis
1959
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 41 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 67 later decisions — most recently April 2015 · most notably Starnes v. Cayouette (1992), Creteau v. Phoenix Assurance Co. of New York (1961)
12 federal appellate · 41 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 McGahey v. State of Virginia · Duffy v. Hartsock · Ferguson v. Ferguson · Gloucester Realty Corp. v. Guthrie · Allen v. Mottley Construction Co.
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 67 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“mere matters of procedure and remedy for their enforcement or preservation may be altered, curtailed or repealed at the will of the legislature so long as a reasonable opportunity and time are afforded to enforce and protect such interests and rights.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“no right in the strict sense to a particular mode of procedure unless [he] avail[ed] [himself] of it while the statute [was] in force”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The generally accepted rule is that statutes of limitation, or remedial statutes, are not retrospective in their application in the absence of clear legislative intent. However, it is the settled law of this State that the legislature may declare a new or an amended statute dealing solely with matters of remedy and procedure, or one not affecting vested interests and contractual rights, to have a retrospective operation. * * Vested interests and contractual rights may not be impaired or destroyed, but mere matters of procedure and remedy for their enforcement may be altered, curtailed or repealed at the will of the legislature so long as a reasonable opportunity and time are afforded to enforce and protect such interests and rights. * *• * ””
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.