Crow v. Abraham’s Empirical Analysis
1917
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently March 1998
2 federal appellate · 13 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 Cromwell v. County of Sac · United States v. California & Oregon Land Co. · United States v. California & Oregon Land Co. · O'Hara v. Parker · Glenn v. Savage
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A question in issue cannot be considered settled by the verdict, when the jury were instructed that such issue was immaterial.” Bingham v. Honeyman, 32 Or. 129 (syl.), ( 51 Pac. 735 , 52 Pac. 755 ). “To entitle a party successfully to invoke the plea of res adjudicata the decision of a prior suit or action between the same parties must have been rendered upon the merits of the controversy: Van Fleet’s Former Ad., § 30; Hughes v. Walker, 14 Or. 481 ( 13 Pac. 450 ); Glenn v. Savage, 14 Or. 567 ( 13 Pac. 442 ); O’Hara v. Parker, 27 Or. 156 ( 39 Pac. 1004 ); Pruitt v. Muldrick, 39 Or. 353 ( 65 Pac. 20 ); Burnett v. Marrs, 62 Or. 598 ( 125 Pac. 838 ). “ ‘The judgment is upon the merits when it amounts to a declaration of the law as to 'the respective rights and duties of the parties, based on the ultimate facts or state of facts disclosed by the pleadings, and evidence upon which the right of recovery depends, irrespective of formal, technical, or dilatory objections or contentions.’ 5 Words & Phrases, 4494. “An examination of the opinion announced in Crow v. Crow, 70 Or. 534 ( 139 Pac. 854 ), will show that all the testimony given at the trial was carefully considered on appeal in order to determine that Henry Gr. Crow was guilty of laches whereby his claim to equitable relief was rendered stale. That decision was within the issues and predicated upon a review of the testimony, thereby rendering the final conclu sion reached a decree upon the merits.” Crow v. Abraham, 86 Or. 99,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““To entitle a party successfully to invoke the plea of res adjudicada, the decision of a prior suit or action between the same parties must have been rendered upon the merits of the controversy. ’ ’”
1 later decision 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.