Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 393 NW2D 758 - Wall v. Lewis

Wall v. Lewis’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

55
cited by 55 later decisions
11
states following
March 2025
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 2 district · 47 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably S.M.S. Textile Mills, Inc. v. Brown, Jacobson, Tillinghast, Lahan & King, P.C. (1993), 595 So. 2d 624 - Lima v. Schmidt (1992)

4 federal appellate · 2 district · 47 state decisions — followed in 11 states

30019861990200020102020decided

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 Associated Press v. United States · Associated Press v. United States · Borgia v. City of New York · Peckham v. Ronrico Corp. · 5 Ohio App. 3d 165 - Brown v. Johnstone

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

  1. “[T]he continuous representation rule appropriately protects the integrity of the attorney-client relationship and affords the attorney an opportunity to remedy his error (or to establish that there has been no error), while simultaneously preventing the attorney from defeating the client's cause of action through delay.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"Thus, the focus is upon whether the plaintiff has been apprised of facts which would place a reasonable person on notice that a potential claim exists. It is not necessary that the plaintiff be subjectively convinced that he has been injured and that the injury was caused by the defendant's negligence."”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “"As applied in legal malpractice actions, the rule tolls the statute of limitations or defers accrual of the cause of action while the attorney continues to represent the client and the representation relates to the same transaction or subject matter as the allegedly negligent acts."”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.