Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 69 KAN 513 - Jones v. Standiferd

Jones v. Standiferd’s Empirical Analysis

1904

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
3
states following
January 1973
most recently cited

15 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently January 1973

15 state decisions

4019041910192019301940195019601970decided

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 Kimball v. Connor · Burdette v. Corgan · Kelso v. Norton · Smith v. Worster · Curry v. Janicke

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.

  1. ““Mary P. Jones and her cod-efendant, T. B. Jones, were duly served with summons in the suit brought by the Wisconsin Planing Mill Company to- foreclose its lieu. They were bound to take notice of the cross-petition of Hiram Holt, filed thereafter, in which he asked for and obtained a decree for the foreclosure of his mortgage and an order of sale of the property in controversy. In Kimball and Others v. Connor, Starks and Others, 3 Kan. 414, 431 , it was said: ‘When the original summons is served the defendants are in court for every purpose connected with the action, and the defendants served are bound to take notice of every step taken therein.’ In Curry v. Janicke, 48 Kan. 168 , 29 Pac. 319 , it was held that when a party has been properly served with summons he must take notice of an answer and cross-petition filed by a defendant who was made a party to the action after the answer-day named in the summons.””
    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.