Swann v. Marks’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
2 district · 57 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently December 2018 · most notably James Ex Rel. Duncan v. James (2002), Miller v. Highland County (2007)
2 district · 57 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 Rockwell v. Allman · McManama v. Plunk · Rennolds v. Williams
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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"To toll the statute of limitations, a suit must be filed against a proper party. Virginia statutes do not authorize an action against an `estate.' Code §§ 8.01-229(B)(1) and (B)(2) direct the decedent's personal representative to file any personal action which the decedent may have been entitled to bring and to defend any personal action which could be brought against the decedent. This limitation is further highlighted by the language of the statute which allows claims to be filed against the property of the estate, but provides that actions may only be filed against the decedent's personal representative. Code §§ 8.01-229(B)(2) and (B)(4). This statutory scheme is consistent with the principle that `suits and actions must be prosecuted by and against living parties.' Rennolds v. Williams, 147 Va. 196, 198 , 136 S.E. 597, 597 (1927). A [complaint] against an `estate' is a nullity and cannot toll the statute of limitations."”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ray v. Ready · Hanson v. Brooks“If a person against whom a personal action may be brought dies before suit papers naming such person as defendant have been filed with the court, then such suit papers may be amended to substitute the decedent's personal representative as party defendant before the expiration of the applicable limitation period or within two years after the date such suit papers were filed with the court, whichever occurs later, and such suit papers shall be taken as properly filed.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he personal representative of a decedent and the decedent's `estate' are two separate entities; the personal representative is a living individual while the `estate' is a collection of property.”
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.