Golatte v. Mathews’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently November 2008
3 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 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 Erie Co v. Tompkins · St Paul Mercury Indemnity Co v. Red Cab Co · Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Estate J Bosch Second National Bank of New Haven · Bell v. Preferred Life Assurance Society · Barry v. Edmunds
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If a party dies and the claim is not thereby extinguished, the court may order substitution of the proper parties.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“" II. Defendant's motion to quash revival and in the alternative motion to dismiss. In the case before the Court, the Plaintiff asked the State Court to revive the suit the Plaintiff had originally filed against Jack T. Mathews in the name of Sue Wilson Mathews, as Executrix of the Estate of Jack T. Mathews. The State Court granted the Plaintiff's request. The significant fact is that the original Defendant, Jack T. Mathews, had died before the Plaintiff ever filed his complaint against Jack T. Mathews. Arguably, there was never a valid pending suit against Jack T. Mathews as he was not living when it was filed. Thus, the question for decision is may lawsuits in Alabama be revived against the legal representatives of deceased tortfeasors who have died before the original complaint against them was filed? "The Defendant in her motion to quash the revival of the suit is asking this Court, in effect, to review the order of the Alabama Circuit Court which granted the Plaintiff's motion to revive the suit. . . . "The Code of Alabama [of 1940], Title 7, § 153, provides in part: " 'No action abates by the death or other disability of the plaintiff or defendant, if the cause of action survive or continue; but the same must, on motion, within twelve months thereafter, be revived in the name of or against the legal representative *Page 244 of the deceased. * * *.' (emphasis added) This section was superseded by Rule 25 of the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure, which states in pertinent ”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“"The facts of the case are that the Plaintiff filed a complaint in State Court on July 26, 1975, in a typical negligence suit, demanding of the Defendant, Jack T. Mathews, damages of $25,000.00. However, the Defendant, Jack T. Mathews, had died on June 15, 1974. On February 4, 1975, the Plaintiff filed a motion in State Court asking that his suit against Jack T. Mathews be revived against Sue Wilson Mathews, as Executrix of the Estate of Jack T. Mathews. . . .”
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.