Smith v. Nelson’s Empirical Analysis
1904
Citation profile
4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently January 1935
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 Crews v. Richards · Hilts v. Ladd
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A bill of review, under the old practice, was employed to revise or modify a decree that had been signed and enrolled, and this for. errors in law apparent upon the face of such decree, or on account of newly discovered facts, unknown to the parties seeking relief at the time of the rendition of the decree, and which could not by the exercise of due diligence have been ascertained or then utilized.” Citing 2 Beach, Mod. Eq. Prac. §852; Bouvier, Diet. tit. “Bill of Review”; Griggs v. Gear, 3 Gilman (Ill.) 2; Smyth v. Fitzsimmons, 97 Ala. 451 ( 12 So. 48 ).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Isler v. Isler
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.