Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 363 P2D 215 - Beck v. Jarrett

Beck v. Jarrett’s Empirical Analysis

1961

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
September 2021
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently September 2021

12 state decisions

401961197019801990200020102020decided

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 Shuler v. Viger · First National Bank v. Kerr · Fowler v. Francis · Wade v. Padberg

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

  1. “While it is true that diligence of litigants in attending to their matters pending in the courts is of importance, and while it is a significant function of the courts that the litigation before them be determined and disposed of as rapidly as possible, it is also important that all litigants be given a reasonable opportunity to have their day in court, and to have their rights and liberties tried upon the merits. The latter is and should be the primary right of the parties and duty of the courts.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The courts should always be loath to deny a determination of a case upon its merits by reason of the actual or supposed fault of an attorney and one of the parties litigant.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““ ‘It is an abuse of discretion for the Court to refuse to open a judgment by default where the answer presents a good defense, and the showing made by the defendant is a reasonable excuse for the absence of the defendant and his attorney at the time of the trial, with no negligence on his part, and where no substantial prejudice would result from the sustaining of such motion.’ ””
    1 later decision 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.