Stinchcomb v. Patteson’s Empirical Analysis
1917
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently July 1997
3 federal appellate · 20 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 Gross v. Heckert · Missouri, O. & G. Ry. Co. v. Collins · Swift v. Ellsworth · Bostwick v. Bryant · State v. Johnson
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““All persons having an interest in the subject of the action, and in obtaining the relief demanded, may be joined as plaintiffs, except as otherwise provided in this article.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““Of the parties to the action, those who are united in interest must be joined as plaintiffs or defendants; but if the consent of one who should have been joined as plaintiff cannot be obtained, he may be made a defendant, the reason being stated in the petition.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““Where two parties have a joint interest in property, they must join in an action for injuries to such property.””
2 later decisions 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.