Mitchell v. Bazille’s Empirical Analysis
1944
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently August 2016
13 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 In Re Skinner & Eddy Corporation · Womach v. City of St. Joseph · Barrett v. Smith · Pioneer Land & Loan Co. v. Bernard · McQuesten v. Commonwealth
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““If the court shall find after hearing that the applicant has not a title proper for registration, an order shall be entered dismissing the application which may be without prejudice. The applicant may upon motion dismiss the application at any time before the final decree is entered upon such terms as shall be fixed by the court.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Mitchell v. Bazille““Our conclusion is that applicant is entitled below to a dismissal of the proceeding'without prejudice, subject only to such terms by way of pecuniary award to save the defendant harmless from loss caused by the institution of the proceeding as the court upon hearing may determine.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Mitchell v. Bazille““* * A second motion for a new trial may be made when it is based on grounds not included in the first one and satisfactory reasons appear for the omission.” (Italics supplied.) See, In re Guardianship of Wood, 140 Minn. 130 , 167 N. W. 358 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Trickel v. Calvin
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.