Kimmel v. Lines’s Empirical Analysis
224 F.2d 644 · 1955
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 2 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently July 1981
7 federal appellate · 2 district · 5 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 Angel v. Bullington · King v. Order of United Commercial Travelers of America · Bruszewski v. United States · United States v. Nugent · Hartmann v. Time, Inc.
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““1. A and B are driving automobiles, which collide. C, a passenger in B’s car, sues A and B. Whether the judgment is -in favor of or against C as to either or both A and B, the issues as to negligence or other element of the cause of action are not res judicata in a subsequent action by A against B for damage to his car.””
3 later decisions 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.