Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 79 MO 382 - Newham v. Kenton

Newham v. Kenton’s Empirical Analysis

1883

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
1
states following
September 1952
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently September 1952 · most notably Hecker v. Bleish (1928), Liese v. Meyer (1898)

3 federal appellate · 23 state decisions

11018831890190019101920193019401950decided

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 Northrup v. Mississippi Valley Insurance · Greenway v. James · DeGraw v. Taylor · McNair v. Biddle · Irwin v. Chiles

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

  1. “. “It is a great misapprehension 1o suppose that one cause of action can bo stated in a bill of equity, and by some sort of comprehensive flexibility of chancery jurisdiction relief .can be administered growing out of a state of facts not embraced within the facts pleaded. The rule that under the general prayer for relief a. party may hare any relief to which he may show himself entitled is limited to relief founded on and consistent with the facts set out in the bill, and not such a« may be proven at the hearing. * * * A p¡wty is not entitled to a judgment, on a finding of fads different from any theory of the case sot up in cite petition or answer.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““The statute permits a party to amend his petition after his evidence has been given, to make it conform to the proofs; but no such thing was attempted in this case. It then presents the singular spectacle of declaring for one cause of action, and obtaining Judgment for another and different cause. Such a course of procedure is destructive of all certainty in pleading, and can neither be tolerated nor encouraged.””
    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.