Backus v. Coyne’s Empirical Analysis
1881
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently May 1939
2 federal appellate · 7 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 Davis v. Emerson · Hugg v. Baltimore & Cuba Smelting & Mining 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Tiie foundation for tile right of contribution in such cases (employment of counsel and costs of suit) is the fact that the expense was incurred in defending for the common benefit. This will not, therefore, permit him to incur expense in uselessly resisting a legal demand, or in creating needless or unnecessary costs and expenses.””
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.