Propst v. Propst’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
November 2012
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Burrell v. Burrell · Curley v. Curley · Headlough v. Headlough · Dowling v. Dowling · Hinchey v. Hinchey
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he court may relieve a party ... from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for [[Image here]] (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence ...; (3) fraud ..., misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party; [[Image here]] The motion shall be made within a reasonable time, and for reasons (1), (2) and (3) not more than one year after the date of notice of the judgment or orders....”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Dixon v. Pouncy
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.