Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 338 F.2d 702 - Brimhall v. Simmons

Brimhall v. Simmons’s Empirical Analysis

338 F.2d 702 · 1964

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
May 2010
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently May 2010

9 federal appellate · 1 district ·

60196419701980199020002010decided

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 Erie Co v. Tompkins · Killian v. United States · Lumbermen's Mutual Casualty Co. v. Elbert · City of New Orleans v. Whitney Whitney · Mexican Central Railway Co. v. Eckman

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

  1. ““(b) Capacity to Sue or Be Sued. The capacity of an individual, other than one acting in a representative capacity, to sue or be sued shall be determined by the law of his domicile. . “(c) Infants or Incompetent Persons. Whenever an infant or incompetent person has a representative, such as a general guardian, committee, conservator, or other like fiduciary, the representative may sue or defend on behalf of the infant or incompetent person. If an infant or incompetent person does not have a duly appointed representative he may sue by his next friend or by a guardian ad litem. The court shall appoint a guardian ad litem for an infant or incompetent person not otherwise represented in an action or shall make such other order, as it deems proper for the protection of the infant or incompetent person.” F.R.C.P. 17.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.