Pace v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
1882
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently April 1992
13 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Another reason, and which has much weight with one member of the majority of the court, is, that, as the writ of attachment was quashed, it may be presumed that the same was irregularly or_ wrongfully sued out, and that the plaintiffs in the attachment suit should not be permitted to take advantage of their own wrong. That having caused the property to be improperly taken from the possession of_ the defendant Smith, they should not be permitted to follow this up by having the proceeds garnished. That the judgment of the court under the law attempted to correct this wrong- by ordering a restitution of the property, and neither Schneider & Davis nor any one else should be permitted to defeat this purpose.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Mundil v. Hutson
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.