McDonald v. Cooper’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 1 district ·

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

1. ““That diligonco has been used to find the defendant within the state must appear from the affidavit, and a mere statement or assertion therein that the -party is a nonresident thereof is not sufficient. Nor is such statement or assertion that diligence has been used a compliance with the, statute. The affidavit must contain some evidence of the ultimate fact, besides the assertion of the affiant, on which the judicial mind may act in granting the order. And however slight and inconclusive this evidence may be, if it has a legal tendency to prove the diligence, and that the defendant could not be found' Within the state, it is sufficient to give the court jurisdiction, and sustain the-order against a collateral attack. But where there is no evidence of such diligence except the bald assertion of the fact, or that 'of nonresidence, the' order is void, and the court does not acquire jurisdiction. * * * It must also appear from the affidavit that the defendant has ‘property’ in this state. The bare assertion that the defendant has such property is not sufficient. Some fact or facts must be stated tending to establish this conclusion on. which the judicial mind may act.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Cohen v. Portland Lodge No. 142 · Johnson v. North Star Lumber Co.

2. ““They [the defendants] cannot he found within the state of Oregon, hut both reside in San Jose, California, and that is their post office address.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Johnson v. North Star Lumber Co.