Mathieson v. Craven’s Empirical Analysis
228 F. 345 · 1915
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently January 1944
1 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 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 United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co. · Galliher v. Cadwell · Simmons Creek Coal Co. v. Doran · Colton v. Colton · John Smith v. Robert Bell
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Laches with respect to tbe bringing of suit is unreasonable and inequitable delay in proceeding for the .enforcement of a demand or right viewed in tbe light of the circumstances of tbe particular case. No rigid rule as to lapse of time is applicable. It is essentially an equitable defense, and does not depend, like tbe operation of a statute of limitations, upon tbe mere passage of time, but upon tbe equity or inequity of permitting tbe asserted' claim or demand to be enforced.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Mathieson v. Craven
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.