Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 248 F.1d 756 - Wright v. Barnard

Wright v. Barnard’s Empirical Analysis

248 F. 756 · 1917

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
March 1959
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 1959

6 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

4019171920193019401950decided

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 Kilbourn v. Sunderland · Insurance Company v. Bailey · Insurance Company v. Dutcher · James Boyce's Executors v. Felix Grundy · Lewis v. Cocks

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

  1. ““For the reasons hereinbefore given the complainant must be held, entitled to receive * * * damages representing the net pecuniary loss sustained by the complainant from being wrongfully deprived through the fraud of the defendants of the opportunity of receiving the specified salary' of $5,000 a year from the time to which it was paid as aforesaid until January 1, 1922; such net pecuniary loss to be ascertained, in the light of the circumstances of the case, including probabilities of life,’the complainant’s earning capacity, and the extent to which he has offset, or had the opportunity of offsetting, or may reasonably be expected to offset, his loss with respect to the nonreceipt of the specified salary. * * * ””
    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.