Triphonoff v. Sweeney’s Empirical Analysis
1913
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently September 1968
15 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 Hillman v. Young · Sturgis v. Baker · Matlock v. Scheuerman · Coos Bay Railroad v. Siglin · Benicia Agricultural Works v. Creighton & Quivey
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““This claim is tantamount to the contention that the action is not prosecuted by the real party in interest. In making such a defense where the same does not appear upon the face of the complaint, the defendant must state facts which constitute the defense and which show that the plaintiff is not the real party in interest”. Sturgis v. Baker, 43 Or. 236, 241 ( 72 P. 744 ).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Cockerham v. Potts
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.