Barnhardt v. Hamel’s Empirical Analysis
1919
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently February 1943
7 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 Smith v. Werkheiser · Dayton v. Monroe · Yanelli v. Littlejohn · Wegner v. Herkimer · Smith v. McDonald
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The relief asked in this form of action does not involve the parties being placed in statu quo, but is only to recover damages for a wrong done, and no special diligence is required to discover the fraud or in bringing such action after discovery short of the statute of limitations.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cole v. Oatman
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.