Davis v. Krauss’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1406 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, Inc. · Goldlawr, Inc. v. Heiman · Fine v. City of New York · Bomar v. Keyes · Donald A. Swan v. Board of Higher Education of the City of New York by Gustave G. Rosenberg, Its Chairman, George A. Pierson, and Margaret v. Kiely
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“unjustified in jurisdictions where timely service of process can be effected after the statute of limitations has run. In those jurisdictions, even an accurately named defendant may not receive actual notice of the action against him prior to the running of the statute of limitations. Yet there is no doubt that the action against him is timely commenced. There is no reason why a misnamed defendant is entitled to earlier notice than he would have received had the complaint named him correctly.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“under Rule 15(c) the period within which “the party to be brought in” must receive notice of the action includes the reasonable time allowed under the federal rules for service of process.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.