Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 358 SW2D 192 - Counts v. Counts

Counts v. Counts’s Empirical Analysis

1962

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
1
states following
September 2010
most recently cited

11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently September 2010

11 state decisions

30196219701980199020002010decided

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 McCullough v. McCullough · Wallace v. Briggs · Moore v. Moore · Mortensen v. Mortensen · Ingham v. Ingham

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

  1. “The failure of an attorney to perform the services for which he was employed, or his absence on the date set for trial or lack of diligence by a litigant in securing an attorney to represent him, or where a litigant fails to take steps to procure another attorney although advised that his counsel has withdrawn from the case, does not excuse such litigant’s failure to take steps to see that he was properly represented at the trial.”
    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.