Coleman v. Lucksinger’s Empirical Analysis
1909
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 32 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently July 1994 · most notably State ex rel. Harvey v. Wright (1913), State ex rel. Audrain County v. Hackmann (1918)
2 federal appellate · 32 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 Kellogg v. Malin · Price v. Blankenship · Dickson v. Desire's Administrator · Chambers' Administrator v. Smith's Administrator · Fontaine v. Boatmens' Savings Institution
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““At common law no local action could be maintained out of the jurisdiction in which it arose, even though the result in many instances would be to deprive a party of all remedy, and where the action was brought by a remote grantee of the land on a covenant which ran with the land, the covenantee’s right of action was based upon privity of estate and not on privity of contract, and the action was deemed local and must have been brought in the place or county in which the land lies.” (Citing cases.) “We concede that this is the settled common-law rule, and the courts of the different States in pur Union, which have maintained this doctrine, have done so under stress of the common law, but, in our opinion, our statute providing for the place of bringing of suits, Sections 562 and 564, Chapter 8, Article 3, Revised Statutes 1899 (Secs. 1751 and 1753, R. S. 1909) has changed this rule and this action on a covenant of seizin or warranty is-one not required to be brought in the county in which the land lies.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“suits instituted by summons shall . . . be brought . . . in the county within which the defendant resides or in the county within which the plaintiff resides and the defendant may be found.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Yates v. Casteel“In this State, by one general system our Legislature has provided for the venue of all civil actions”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Yates v. Casteel
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.