Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 291 N.Y. 181 - Mohrmann v. Kob

Mohrmann v. Kob’s Empirical Analysis

1943

Citation profile

56
cited by 56 later decisions
13
states following
June 2024
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 48 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently June 2024 · most notably Daine v. Commissioner (1948), 73 Cal. App. 2d 330 - Cohen v. Cohen (1946)

2 federal appellate · 48 state decisions — followed in 13 states

210194319501960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Galusha v. . Galusha · Johnson v. . Johnson · Erkenbrach v. . Erkenbrach · Merrick v. Merrick · 7 E.H. Smith 449 - Grannan v. . Westchester Racing Assn.

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

  1. “The function of orders nunc pro tunc is to correct irregularities in the entry of judicial mandates or like procedural errors. ... “When a ruling has in fact been made but is improperly evidenced by a defective mandate, or by no mandate at all, an appropriate and suitable order or judgment which manifests the existence of a determination may subsequently be granted to take effect as of the date of such determination.” Merrick v. Merrick, [ 266 N.Y. 120, 122 , 194 N.E. 55 ] [(1934)]. However, ... “[a] court has no power to have a new order or ruling so entered, thus bringing into the record an element which did not previously exist.””
    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.