Little v. Harrington’s Empirical Analysis
1880
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 44 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently June 1931 · most notably Thomasson v. Mercantile Town Mutual Insurance (1909), Osmak v. American Car & Foundry Co. (1931)
2 federal appellate · 44 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 Rippstein v. St. Louis Mutual Life Insurance · Cannon v. McManus · Fordyce v. Hathorn
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 48 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is evident from those statutory provisions that only one answer is contemplated, and this to contain whatever defense or defenses the defendant may have, thus dispensing with the common-law rule that a plea in bar waives all dilatory pleas, or pleas not going to the merits. * * * Matter in abatement is as much a defense to the pending actions as matter in bar, and to say that the defendant may reserve the latter until a trial shall have been had upon the issues, in regard to the former would interpolate what is not in the statute; would be inconsistent with its plain and simple requirements.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cole v. Carson
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.