Millett v. Dumais’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
1 district · 11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently November 2016
1 district · 11 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 Henry W. Grunewald v. United States · Tozer v. Charles A. Krause Milling Co. · Flaks v. Koegel · 25 Cal. 2d 226 - Pashley v. Pacific Electric Railway Co. · Guy v. SCHULDT
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.
“If a person, liable to any action mentioned, fraudulently conceals the cause thereof from the person entitled thereto, or if a fraud is committed which entitles any person to an action, the action may be commenced at any time within 6 years after the person entitled thereto discovers that he has just cause of action.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“the importance of the parties being diligent in the trial of cases against the general disfavor with which the law views judgments by default. As has been said: [Substantial rights should not be determined by default if that procedure can reasonably be avoided and no substantial prejudice has resulted.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Truman v. Browne
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.