Hunter v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis
1933
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently August 1973
12 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 Wright v. John T. Hardie & Co. · Odum v. Garner
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““There is some conflict in the decisions of the various Courts of Civil Appeals as to whether such' courts are authorized, under the terms of the amended act, to extend the time for filing the transcript unless the motion for such extension is made before the expiration of the sixty-day period allowed for the filing of the transcript. “The Texarkana Court of Civil Appeals in Walker v. Lyles, 45 S.W.(2d) 315 , the San Antonio Court in Reasonover v. Reasonover, 46 S.W. (2d) 382 , the Eastland Court in Reed v. Indemnity Co., 47 S.W. (2d) 860, and the Beaumont Court in Reese v. Owens, 48 S.W. (2d) 697 , all held that the good cause described in the amended article 1839 must be shown before the expiration of the sixty-day period provided in the act. * * * “The only express holding to the contrary is that made by the Dallas Court of Civil Appeals in the case of C. S. Hamilton Motor Co. v. Muckleroy, 46 S.W. (2d) 451 . In that case, however, Chief Justice Jones filed a vigorous dissenting opinion in which he reviewed .the history of the legislation on this subject and announced the conclusion that the amended act is susceptible of but one construction, and that is that the showing of good cause-before the expiration of the sixty-day period is a condition prerequisite to the granting of an extension. of time beyond the period provided in the statute. “After a full consideration of the matter, we find ourselves in accord with the views so ably, expressed on the subject by Chief Justic”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Parks v. Purnell““Since in this case appellants’ motion for extension of time was filed more than thirty days after the expiration of the period allowed for filing the transcript, the Court of Civil Appeals was without authority to extend the time even though good cause existed for failing to file within the time required by law.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Buckalew v. Fancher
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.