Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 55 SW2D 1028 - Nail v. Compton

Nail v. Compton’s Empirical Analysis

1932

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
May 1997
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Willis v. Lyman, Sears & Co. · Cherryhomes v. Carter · Spencer v. Davis · Evans v. Lawson, Smith & Co. · Perrill & Fox v. Runge

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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “• the defendant is justly indebted to the plaintiff; • the attachment is not sought to injure or harass the defendant; • the plaintiff will probably lose his debt unless the writ of attachment is issued; and • specific grounds for the writ exist under section 61.002 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code.”
    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.