Fyffe v. Skaggs’s Empirical Analysis
1932
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently June 1981
7 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 Fox v. Buckingham · Louisville & Nashville R. R. v. Tuggle's Admr. · Power Grocery Co. v. Hinton · Erskine v. Chevrolet Motors Co. · Bauer Cooperage Co. v. Ewell
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The answer of Fyffe presenting his defense was not controverted of record nor by a reply. For this reason he argues that he was entitled to judgment on the pleadings. The court, the parties, and their counsel treated the affirmative allegations in his answer as controverted. After a trial on the evidence as if the answer was properly controverted, he cannot be heard in this court to contend that the facts were not put in issue because no reply was filed to his answer [Marshall v. Craig, 1 Bibb, 379, 383 ( 4 Am. Dec. 647 ); L. & N. R. Co. v. Tuggle’s Adm’r, 151 Ky. 409 , 152 S. W. 270 ], or that the judgment was not authorized by the pleadings. ’ ’”
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.