Kool v. Lee’s Empirical Analysis
1913
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently January 2010
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 8 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 Bartlett v. Christhilf · Mayer v. Walter · Bonney v. King · Wood v. Graves · Norcross v. Otis Bros.
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the defendant ... cannot be held responsible for maliciously causing the [initiation of process against] the plaintiff, but only for some improper use made of the [process] ... after it was issued.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“'it is not necessary to show either malice or want of probable cause, nor that the proceeding had terminated, and it is immaterial whether such proceeding was baseless or not'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“'an act in the use of the process not proper in the regular prosecution of the proceedings.!”
1 later decision 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.