Allen v. Cooley’s Empirical Analysis
1898
Citation profile
5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently March 1984
5 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.
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It will be observed that the application of the receiver was simply for instructions... It was not a motion to take property from the possession of one party and deliver it to another ... The receiver is an officer or agent of the court, — the hand of the court, as it is expressed in some of the cases, — and when the court takes possession of property, and places it in the hands of a receiver,... and when application is made to the court for instructions ..., we see no necessity for notice of the application, and know of no statute which requires notice of such an application.”
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.