Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 240 F.2d 782 - Kay Hunt v. Vernon J. Pick, Andrew Hunt v. Vernon J. Pick

Kay Hunt v. Vernon J. Pick, Andrew Hunt v. Vernon J. Pick’s Empirical Analysis

240 F.2d 782 · 1957

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
3
states following
May 1986
most recently cited

27 federal appellate · 4 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently May 1986 · most notably Homestake Mining Company and Homestake-New Mexico Partners v. Mid-Continent Exploration Company, Rio De Oro Uranium Mines, Inc. v. Homestake Mining Company, J. H. Whitney & Co., White, Weld & Co., and San Jacinto Petroleum Corp. v. Homestake Mining Company, United Western Minerals Company v. Rio De Oro Uranium Mines, Inc., J. H. Whitney & Co., White, Weld & Co., San Jacinto Petroleum Corp., Clyde Osborn, and Homestake Mining Company, Homestake Mining Company v. Rio De Oro Uranium Mines, Inc., United Western Minerals Company, J. H. Whitney & Co., White, Weld & Co., San Jacinto Petroleum Corp., and Clyde Osborn (1960), United States v. Kansas Gas & Electric Co. (1961)

27 federal appellate · 4 district · 3 state decisions

2101957196019701980decided

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 Patterson v. Hewitt · Birkett v. Columbia Bank · Avrick v. Rockmont Envelope Co. · Schreffler v. Bowles · Dulansky v. Iowa-Illinois Gas & Electric Co.

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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[t]he essential question to be determined is whether the assertion of the plaintiff’s cause has, through the lapse of time considered with the circumstances and nature of the alleged cause, become unconscionable and, if allowed to prevail, would constitute an injustice to defendants.”
    1 later decision 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.