Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 34 Colo. App. 128 - Potts v. Gordon

34 Colo. App. 128 - Potts v. Gordon’s Empirical Analysis

1974

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
5
states following
March 2012
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 33 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently March 2012 · most notably Liberty Nat. v. Univ. of Ala. Health Servs. (2003), Jacobucci v. District Court (1975)

1 federal appellate · 33 state decisions

9019741980199020002010decided

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 Provident Tradesmens Bank & Trust Co. v. Patterson · Woodco v. Lindahl · Bradley v. School Board of Richmond · Colorado Fuel & Iron Corp. v. Salardino · Dynatech Corp. v. Frigitronics, Inc.

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

  1. ““A person who is properly subject to service of process in the action shall be joined as a party in the action if: (1) In his absence complete relief cannot be accorded among those already parties, or (2) he claims an interest relating to the subject of the action and is so situated that the disposition of the action in his absence may: (A) As a practical matter impair or impede his ability to protect that interest or (B) leave any of the persons already parties subject to a substantial risk of incurring double, multiple, or otherwise inconsistent obligations by reason of his claimed interest.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Joinder is `feasible' under [Rule 19, Colo.R.Civ.P., substantially similar to Rule 19, Ala.R.Civ.P] as long as the absentee is subject to service of process; his joinder will not deprive the court of jurisdiction; and he has no valid objection to venue of the court.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[Jloinder has even been required under this rule after trial where the issue was first raised on appeal.”
    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.