Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 308 MASS 431 - Kennedy v. Simmons

Kennedy v. Simmons’s Empirical Analysis

1941

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
2
states following
April 2004
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently April 2004 · most notably Lowell Bar Ass'n v. Loeb (1943), Rummel v. Peters (1943)

2 federal appellate · 23 state decisions

1501941195019601970198019902000decided

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 State of Texas v. State of Florida · Gilbert v. David · Margaret Williamson v. Katherine Osenton · Spiegel v. Beacon Participations, Inc. · Trade Mutual Liability Insurance v. Peters

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

  1. ““Rev.St.1836, c. 83, § 12, provided that the jurisdiction of the Probate Court, in so far as it depended upon the residence of any person, should not be contested in any other proceeding except by an appeal from the original decree, unless the want of jurisdiction appeared upon the record, and this provision continued in force until it was superseded by St.1891, c. 415, making probate courts courts of superior and general jurisdiction. This statute made the previous provision unnecessary, because thereafter the decrees of the probate courts were to be given the same effect as that usually attributed to those of a court of superior and general jurisdiction. In the absence of anything in the record to the contrary it must be assumed that the decree was based upon proof of all the essential jurisdictional facts. Farnsworth v. Goebel, 240 Mass. 18 , 132 N.E. 414 ; Schmidt v. Schmidt, 280 Mass. 216 , 182 N.E. 374 ; Wilbur v. Hallett, 305 Mass. 554 , 26 N.E.2d 322 .””
    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.