Walker v. Mummert’s Empirical Analysis
1958
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 65 later decisions — most recently September 2006 · most notably Michael Meyers, Individually and as Representative of a Class v. Pennypack Woods Home Ownership Association and Marion A. Steinbronn (1977), Elizabeth Arnold Lake v. Frederick S. Arnold (2000)
19 federal appellate · 17 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 Salvation Army Case · Lerch's Estate · Peterson ex rel. Peterson v. Delaware River Ferry Co. · Warfield v. Fox · Williams v. Ivory
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 65 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'injury wrongfully done to the person, in cases where the injury does not result in death' expresses a limitation only on actions for bodily injury whereas (plaintiff's) claim is for tortious interference with his right to contract for the purchase of a house.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“it is always unfortunate when an innocent injured party through no fault of his own, is denied deserved compensation from a wrongdoer. On the other hand, however, the very reasons which support the establishment of a statute of limitations also militate against exceptions thereto. Thus permitting the deferment of the institution of a personal injury claim until the end of a prospective plaintiffs period of disability seriously prejudices the person against whom suit is brought. With the passage of time a defendant may be hard pressed to assert his innocence of wrongdoing, for, his evidence may disappear or become unavailable, his witnesses scatter and die, and their memories become dim.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““The act of 1895, as held in the case referred to, is a general act in the nature of a statute of limitations. Its terms are general, and make no exceptions in favor of persons under disability. The settled rule is that infants, as well as all others, are bound by the provisions of such statutes. ‘A savings from the operation of statutes for disabilities must be expressed or it does not exist.’ Warfield v. Fox, 53 Pa.St. 382 . ‘There is no limitation in the act which excludes persons under disabilities. “Any person” means every person. * * * ’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Jones v. Rabinowitz
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.