Southern Construction Co. v. Pickard’s Empirical Analysis
1962
Citation profile
112 federal appellate · 54 district · 76 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 467 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2022 · most notably Reiter v. Cooper (1993), Ellis v. Crockett (1969)
112 federal appellate · 54 district · 76 state decisions — followed in 17 states
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedUnited States ex rel. Pickard v. Southern Construction Co. (from Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Ker v. California · United States of America, Libelant-Appellant v. Eastport Steamship Corporation · United States ex rel. Pickard v. Southern Construction Co.
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 467 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“to prevent multiplicity of actions and to achieve resolution in a single lawsuit of all disputes arising out of common matters.”
23 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A pleading shall state as a counterclaim any claim which at the time of serving the pleading the pleader has against any opposing party, if it arises out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the opposing party's claim and does not require for its adjudication the presence of third parties of whom the court cannot acquire jurisdiction.”
21 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[0]n this point the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversed. It held that since there had been no allocation of the $35,000 payment as between the Georgia and Tennessee projects the item, under Rule 13(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., was a ‘potential compulsory counterclaim’ in either of the two suits; that when the responsive pleading in the Georgia suit was filed the counterclaim was not the subject of any other pending action and was therefore ‘compulsory’ in that suit; and, accordingly, that such counterclaim could not later be asserted in the present action.”
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.