Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 7 FRD 92 - Sinkbeil v. Handler

Sinkbeil v. Handler’s Empirical Analysis

1946

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
5
states following
September 1967
most recently cited

8 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently September 1967

8 district · 5 state decisions

60194619501960decided

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 Erie Co v. Tompkins · Kline v. Burke Construction Co. · Freeman v. Bee Machine Co. · United States v. Association of American Railroads · Noma Electric Corp. v. Polaroid Corp.

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

  1. ““This court acknowledges its entertainment of considerable sympathy with the thought that, short of abuse or practical impropriety, a reasonable latitude should be allowed to a pleader in the statement of his claim or defense; and that not every dubious or errant phrase in a pleading should be eradicated from it to suit the taste of a critical adversary. In practice, what matters is not alone whether the phrase is immaterial, but-whether, its presence, if it be immaterial, is calculated to be harmful.””
    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.