Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 599 NE2D 217 - Chapin v. Hulse

Chapin v. Hulse’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
1
states following
January 2017
most recently cited

19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently January 2017

19 state decisions

140199220002010decided

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 157 Ind. App. 385 - Farley v. Farley · 150 Ind. App. 193 - Decatur County RE Mem. Corp. v. Public Service Co. · BOARD OF TRUSTEES, ETC. v. City of Fort Wayne · State Ex Rel. Dean v. Tipton Circuit Court · Manns v. State of Indiana Department of Highways

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

  1. “'only such continuing jurisdiction as is permitted by the judgment itself, or as is given the court by statute or rule”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “has no legal effect at any time and cannot be confirmed or ratified by subsequent action or inaction. That which is”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “(B) Mistake-Excusable neglect-Newly discovered evidence-Fraud, ete. On motion and upon such terms as are just the court may relieve a party or his legal representative from an entry of default, final order, or final judgment, including a judgment by default, for the following reasons: (1) mistake, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) any ground for a motion to correct error, including without limitation newly discovered evidence, which by due diligence could not have been discovered in time to move for a motion to correct errors under Rule 59; (3) fraud (whether heretofore denominated intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party; (4) entry of default or judgment by default was entered against such party who was served only by publication and who was without actual knowledge of the action and judgment, order or proceedings; * * Pa (8) any reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment, other than those reasons set forth in sub-paragraphs (1), (2), (8), and (4).”
    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.