Coyle v. Swanson’s Empirical Analysis
1962
Citation profile
2 district · 14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently October 1998
2 district · 14 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
Relies on Nash v. Lang · Squires v. Fraska · Doherty v. Ernst · Crompton v. Williams · Hurnanen v. Nicksa
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is not confined to the person who has the absolute right to a chattel, but also applies to a person who has the possession and control of it.”
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.