Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 72 NEB 89 - Martin v. Abbott

Martin v. Abbott’s Empirical Analysis

1904

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
5
states following
February 2006
most recently cited

5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently February 2006

5 state decisions

2019041910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Sampson v. Ohleyer · Sharp v. Lumley · Clark v. Charles · Lincoln Rapid Transit Co. v. Rundle · Parker v. Courtnay

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. “The statute makes no provision for a supersedeas bond in a case like the one at bar. And therefore we think the failure to file such a bond is no protection to one who purchases the property from a litigant with actual notice of the pendency of the suit in which the title thereto is in question.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.