Leeks v. Leeks’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently April 2013
6 state decisions
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
Applies 38 U.S.C. § 1804
Relies on Provident Tradesmens Bank & Trust Co. v. Patterson · Ackermann v. United States · Consolidated Edison Co. of New York v. United States · McShan v. Sherrill · Annat v. Beard
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.
“We find that this case is an appropriate one for modifying the judgment in order to protect the interest of the absent heirs, as to whom the judgment should not be res judicata, without disturbing the finality of [William Leeks’] judgment against [Joyce Leeks].”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Leeks v. Leeks
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.