Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 67 KAN 497 - True v. Mendenhall

True v. Mendenhall’s Empirical Analysis

1903

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
November 1937
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Truly v. Wanzer · Dobbins v. McNamara · Wilson v. Hawthorne · Blakeslee v. Murphy · Magin v. Lamb

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

  1. ““ . . . a large preponderance of the authorities hold that, notwithstanding an alleged want of service of process, a court of equity will not interfere to set aside a judgment until it appears that the result, upon a subsequent trial, will be other than, or different from, that already reached; or, in other words, that, there was a defense to the action, either entire or partial.” (p. 424.) (See, also, O’Neil v. Eppler, 90 Kan. 314 , 133 Pac. 705 , and State Reserve Bank v. Daniels, 142 Kan. 694 , 51 P. 2d 1009 .)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.