Sundgren v. Stevens’s Empirical Analysis
1911
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently March 1990
1 federal appellate · 21 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 McDonald v. . Walter · Harrod v. Latham Mercantile & Commercial Co. · Lonergan v. William Small & Co. · Engmann v. Estate of Immel · Pritchard v. Hewitt
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"The fact that the provision of the former code forbidding a new trial for smallness of damages was omitted from the present civil code is an indication that the legislature deemed inadequacy a proper ground for a new trial, ..." (p. 161.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“"... The rule may be hard, and in some cases may be productive of injustice, but that is a consideration to be addressed to the lawmakers and not to the law interpreters." (pp. 256, 257.)”
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.