Kelley v. Boettcher’s Empirical Analysis
85 F. 55 · 1898
Citation profile
71 federal appellate · 4 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 106 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2009 · most notably Ac Aukerman Company v. Rl Chaides Construction Co (1992), Russell v. Todd (1940)
71 federal appellate · 4 district · 5 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 Wood v. Carpenter · Antoine Michoud v. Peronne Bernardine Girod · Badger v. Badger · Godden v. Kimmell · Prevost v. Gratz
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 106 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“‘‘Has the complainant been guilty of such laches that he may not invoke the aid of a court of equity? Courts of chancery are not bound by, but in the application of the doctrine of laches they usually act or refuse to act in analogy to, the statute of limitations relating to actions at law of like character. Under ordinary circumstances, a suit in equity will not be stayed for laches before, and will be stayed after, the time fixed by the analogous statute of limitations at law. But if unusual conditions or extraordinary circumstances make it inequitable to allow the prosecution of a suit after a briefer, or to forbid its maintenance after a longer, period than that fixed by the statute, the chancellor will not be bound by the statute, but will determine the extraordinary case in accordance with the equities which condition it. When a suit is brought within the time fixed by the analogous statute, the burden is on the defendant to show, either from the face of the bill, ■or by his answer, that extraordinary circumstances exist, which require the application of the doctrine of laches. And when such a suit is brought after the statutory time has elapsed, the burden is on the complainant to show, by suitable averments in his bill, that it would be inequitable to apply it to his case.””
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““In (he application of (he doctrine of laches, the settled rule is that courts of equity are not bound by, but that they usually act or refuse to act; in analogy-to. the statute of limitations relating to actions at law of like character, Rugan v. Sabin, 10 U. S. App. 519, 534, 3 C. C. A. 578 , 582, and 53 Fed. 415 , 420; Billings v. Smelting Co., 10 U. S. App. 1, 62, 2. C. C. A. 252, 262, 263, and 51 Fed. 338 , 349; Bogan v. Mortgage Co., 27 U. S. App. 346, 357, 11 C. C. A. 128 , 135, and 63 Fed. 192 , 199: Kinne v. Webb, 12 U. S. App. 137, 148, 4 C. C. A. 170 , 177, and 54 Fed. 34 , 40: Scheftel v. Hays, 19 U. S. App. 220, 226. 7 C. C. A. 308 , 312, and 58 Fed. 457 , 460; Wagner v. Baird, 7 How. 234 , 258, 12 L. Ed. 681 : Godden v. Kimmell, 99 U. S. 201 , 210, 25 L. Ed. 431 ; Wood v. Carpenter, 101 U. S. 135 , 139, 23 L. Ed. 807 . The meaning of this rule is that under ordinary circumstances a suit in equity will not be stayed for laches before, and will be stayed after the time fixed by the analogous statute of limitations at law: but if unusual conditions or extraordinary circumstances make it inequitable to allow the prosecution of a suit after a briefer, or to forbid its maintenance after a longer, period than that fixed by the statute, the chancellor will not be bound by the statute, but will determine the extraordinary ease in accordance with the equities which condition it. * * * When a suit is brought within tiro time fixed by the analogous statute, the burden is on”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““There is no fatal misjoinder of causes of action in equity in any bill which presents a common point of litigation, the decision of which will affect the whole subject-matter and will settle the rights of all the parties to the suit.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.