Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 253 Mich. 588 - Albaugh v. Abbott

Albaugh v. Abbott’s Empirical Analysis

1931

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
4
states following
March 1976
most recently cited

6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently March 1976

6 state decisions

3019311940195019601970decided

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 Stodder v. Rosen Talking Machine Co. · Lockwood Co. v. Lawrence · Warren v. . Parkhurst · Rowbotham v. Jones · King v. American Rock Crusher

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

  1. ““. . . A number of plaintiffs may be joined in one action when they are all injured in a similar manner and are interested in the same sort of relief, and a number of defendants may likewise be joined in one action when they all contributed to the creating of a nuisance. A multiplicity of suits can thus be readily avoided. . . Albaugh v. Abbott (1931), 253 Mich. 588, 593 , 235 N. W. 263 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““It was proper to join them, where, as it was shown, each one contributed to the nuisance. Had they not been joined each might have blamed the other for being the cause of the conditions described. They all contributed together towards causing the nuisance, and each one was severally guilty of the charges in the bill of complaint.””
    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.