Fry v. Estes’s Empirical Analysis
1892
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 district · 16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently October 1988
1 federal appellate · 1 district · 16 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 Scovill v. Glasner · Kirksey v. Jones · Lindsay v. Larned · State ex rel. Roe v. Thomas · State ex rel. Hayden v. McHale
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““No case can be found in this state wherein the plaintiff sued in one count for the wrongful, and in the other for the malicious, attachment of his property, nor is there any reason for adopting that course, since, if an action on the case will lie for a wrongful attachment, malice in the attachment merely goes in ag gravation of the damages and furnishes no independent cause of action.” (p. 9.)”
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.