Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 30 WIS2D 663 - Howard v. Preston

Howard v. Preston’s Empirical Analysis

1966

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
3
states following
January 2005
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently January 2005 · most notably 71 Wis. 2d 424 - Danielson v. Brody Seating Co. (1976), 47 Wis. 2d 67 - Heaston v. Austin (1970)

3 federal appellate · 19 state decisions

15019661970198019902000decided

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 Dellinger v. Clark · Hammond-Chandler Lumber Co. v. Industrial Commission · Gilbert-Arnold Land Co. v. O'Hare · Township of Westport v. City of Madison

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

  1. “[sJLipshod and haphazard attempts to serve are not sufficient.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Personal jurisdiction, manner of serving summons for. A court of this state having jurisdiction of the subject matter and grounds for personal jurisdiction as provided in s. 801.05 may exercise personal jurisdiction over a defendant by service of a summons as follows: (1) Natural person. Except as provided in sub. (2) upon a natural person: (a) By personally serving the summons upon the defendant either within or without this state, (b) If with reasonable diligence the defendant cannot be served under par. (1), then by leaving a copy of the summons at the defendant's usual place of abode; (c) If with reasonable diligence the defendant cannot be served under par. (a) or (b), service may be made by publication of the summons as a class 3 notice, under ch. 985, and by mailing. If the defendant's post-office address is known or can with reasonable diligence be ascertained, there shall be mailed to the defendant, at or immediately prior to the first publication, a copy of the summons and a copy of the complaint. The mailing may be omitted if the post-office address cannot be ascertained with reasonable diligence.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “For personal service or its equivalent, the summons, and the accompanying complaint or notice aforesaid, if any, shall be served by delivering a copy thereof as follows: (3) In all other cases by delivering within the state a copy thereof to the defendant personally; or, if not found, by leaving within the state a copy thereof at his usual place of abode in the presence of some competent member of the family at least fourteen years of age, who shall be informed of the contents 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.