Ford v. Adkins’s Empirical Analysis
1941
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently November 2009
3 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 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 Waterman v. Canal-Louisiana Bank & Trust Co. · Payne v. Hook · Mitchell v. Smale · Wilson v. Oswego Tp · Boatmen's Bank v. Fritzlen
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Is the absen[t] person’s interest in the subject matter of the litigation such that no decree can be entered in the case which will do justice between the parties actually before the court without injuriously affecting the right of such absent person?”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hicks v. JOONDEPH
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.