Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 25 MINN 148 - Bennett v. Whitcomb

Bennett v. Whitcomb’s Empirical Analysis

1878

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
4
states following
February 1950
most recently cited

16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently February 1950

16 state decisions

50187818801890190019101920193019401950decided

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 Horn v. Volcano Water Co. · Gasquet v. Johnson · Speyer v. Ihmels & Co. · St. John v. West

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

  1. “Any person who has an interest in the matter in litigation, in the success of either of the parties to the action, or against either or both, may become a party to any action or proceeding between other persons, either by joining the plaintiff in claiming what is sought by the complaint, or by uniting with the defendant in resisting the claim of the plaintiff, or by demanding anything adversely to both the plaintiff and defendant, or either of them, either before or after issue has been joined in the cause, and before the trial commences. The court shall determine upon the issues made by the intervention at the same time that the issue in the main action is decided, and the intervenor has no right to delay.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “From an order involving the merits of the action or some part thereof,”
    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.