Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 242 Wis. 226 - Bailey v. Tully

Bailey v. Tully’s Empirical Analysis

1942

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
7
states following
June 1979
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 24 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently June 1979 · most notably McElreath v. McElreath (1961), Simmons v. Superior Court (1950)

3 federal appellate · 24 state decisions

1101942195019601970decided

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 McArthur v. Moffet · Fall v. Fall · Frame v. Thormann · Mallette v. Scheerer · Dickson v. Loehr

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

  1. “"(1) A valid foreign judgment that the defendant do or refrain from doing an act other than the payment of money will not be enforced by an action on the judgment. "(2) In an action on the original claim, the effect of res judicata will be given to findings of fact in a prior suit between the parties in which a valid judgment was rendered requiring the defendant to do or refrain from doing an act other than the payment of money."”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““We think, however, that where the court of a sister state, having jurisdiction of the person of the defendants and jurisdiction to bind their consciences, enters a decree ordering a conveyance of land located in Wisconsin, the findings of fact supporting such a decree must be given the effect of res ajudicata.” Bailey v. Tully, 242 Wis. 226 at 233 , 7 N.W.2d 837 at 840 , 145 A.L.R. 578 (1943).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.