Patrick v. Sedwick’s Empirical Analysis
1966
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 50 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently October 2020 · most notably Beaulieu v. Elliott (1967), Malvo Ex Rel. Malvo v. J. C. Penney Co. (1973)
2 federal appellate · 50 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 Messenger v. Anderson · International Ass'n of Machinists v. Duckworth · Hatahley v. United States · Killian v. United States · National Labor Relations Board v. F. W. Woolworth Co.
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]hen a party recovers a money judgment in contested litigation the trial judge should indicate on the record his reasons for nonadherence to the fee schedule set forth in Civ.R. 82(a) in determining his award of attorney’s fees.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“Under the terms of this court’s remand the trial court was vested with wide discretion as to the precise manner in which the damage issues were to be determined. And as pointed out earlier, the trial judge concluded upon remand that he could determine the damage issues upon the record of the evidence adduced at the October 1961 trial. 33”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“These requirements are that the evidence (1) must be such as would probably change the result on a new trial; (2) must have been discovered since the trial; (3) must be of such a nature that it could not have been discovered before trial by due diligence; (4) must be material; (5) must not be merely cumulative or impeaching.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Grothe v. Olafson
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.