State v. John’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 state decisions

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

1. “The general rule is that when a new limitation is made to apply to existing rights or causes of action, a reasonable time in which such rights may be asserted or suits brought must be allowed before the limitation takes effect. 51 Am. Jur.2d, Limitations of Actions, Sec. 31. But if the new statute does not provide for a reasonable time after the effective date within which to assert existing rights or bring suits, it may not be necessary to invalidate the law. The better construction is to apply the new limitation period to existing causes prospectively, unless that is unreasonable or prohibited by the language of the statute. Stover v. Union Bank, 115 Tenn. 347 , 89 S.W. 399 (1905); Redmon v. LaFevre, 503 S.W.2d 97 (Tenn.1973). We think the statute is valid. In our opinion the limitation period in the statute must be applied to appellant’s right prospectively. The period began to run on the effective date of the law, July 1, 1986, and the petition was timely filed.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. American Network Group, Inc. v. Kostyk