Kaiser v. Loomis’s Empirical Analysis
391 F.2d 1007 · 1968
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 5 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently January 2017 · most notably Certain Interested Underwriters at Lloyd's, London, England v. Layne (1994), Kubin v. Miller (1992)
10 federal appellate · 5 district ·
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 Smith v. Sperling · Mullen v. Torrance · Margaret Williamson v. Katherine Osenton · Yarborough v. Yarborough · Mitchell v. United States
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“First, residence in a new domicil; and, second, the intention to remain there. The change cannot be made except facto et animo. Both are alike necessary. Either without the other is insufficient. Mere absence from a fixed home, however long continued, cannot work the change.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Gutierrez v. Fox
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.