Hess v. Eddy’s Empirical Analysis
689 F.2d 977 · 1982
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2013 · most notably Eddy v. Hess (1983), Beal for Martinez v. City of Seattle (1998)
15 federal appellate · 9 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
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, Inc. · Board of Regents of Univ. of State of NY v. Tomanio · Robertson v. Wegmann · Surowitz v. Hilton Hotels Corp. · Levinson v. Deupree
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“No action shall be dismissed on the ground that it is not prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest until a reasonable time has been allowed after objection for ratification of commencement of the action by, or joinder or substitution of, the real party in interest; and such ratification, joinder, or substitution shall have the same effect as if the action had been commenced in the name of the real party in interest.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The plain language of the Rule clearly provides that when an action is brought by someone other than the real party in interest within the limitations period, and the real party in interest joins or ratifies the action after the limitations period has run, the amendment or ratification relates back to the time suit was originally filed and the action need not be dismissed as time barred.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“erred in applying Alabama's 'no relation-back' rule in the face of a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure [17(a)] that expressly authorizes and adopts the 'relation-back' doctrine”
2 later decisions 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.