Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 27 OR 282 - White v. Johnson

White v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

1895

Citation profile

41
cited by 41 later decisions
6
states following
April 1974
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 34 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently April 1974 · most notably in the Matter of W P Connaway Receiver of the Moscow National Bank of Moscow Idaho (1900), White v. Ladd (1902)

2 federal appellate · 34 state decisions

110189519001910192019301940195019601970decided

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 Pennoyer v. Neff · Judson v. Love · Lyman v. Milton · Kellar v. Stanley · De Cordova v. . Barnum

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

  1. ““A summons may be said to have issued in an action commenced in the Circuit or County Courts of this state when it is made out and signed by the plaintiff or his attorney, and placed in the hands of the sheriff, with the intention that it be served upon the defendant. It is difficult to see how anything less than this would constitute an issuance of a summons. The statute requires that the summons shall be served by the sheriff, and without a delivery to him for service such instrument is not yet endowed with vitality for any purpose.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““The plaintiff, at the time of issuing the summons, or any time afterward, may have the property of the defendant attached.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “, “Then, under section 69, Gen. St. Minn. 1878 (section 5209, Gen. St. 1894), from the time when, the service is thus complete ‘the court is deemed to have acquired jurisdiction, and to have control of all subsequent proceedings.’ If the party upon whom the service is being made dies before it is complete,— that is, before the required publications have been made, — the service cannot be completed, there being no person in being upon whom to make it; and whatever has been done short of complete service is of no avail, and the court acquires no jurisdiction through it.” Whereupon the learned justice adds: “Thus it appears that the court is without power or authority to take any action looking to the rendition of a personal judgment merely, without first attaining jurisdiction through the service of a summons upon the defendant. Aliter, from the time of the service of the summons, the court has control of all subsequent proceedings.””
    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.