Smith v. Haden’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
1 district · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently April 2024
1 district · 10 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 Morrison v. MacNamara · O'NEIL v. Bergan · 215 N.J. Super. 388 - Gautam v. De Luca · 158 N.J. Super. 158 - Hoppe v. Ranzini · 422 So. 2d 1109 - Jenkins v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co.
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“To also require a plaintiff to show the degree of collectability of a judgment in a legal malpractice case is subject to criticism on several grounds. For example, it wholly ignores the possibility of a settlement between plaintiff and the potential defendant, either before or after judgment, which may be encouraged by active litigation of a claim. * * * In addition, the passage of time itself can be a significant factor militating either for or against the collectability of a judgment. It is not without significance that a judgment is valid for many years. * * * In this case, for example, it may be that [the original defendant's] financial situation has improved since he declared bankruptcy or that, as Plaintiff suggests, as a matter of law Plaintiff's judgment would not be a dischargeable debt, thereby giving Plaintiff a preference over a discharge creditor whose debt has been reaffirmed. [Citations omitted.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Pipino v. Norman“{¶ 36} “In a normal civil lawsuit, * * * a plaintiff must prove each required element to make out a case against the defendant in order to obtain a judgment. It is not necessary to demonstrate that plaintiff will successfully be able to execute on the judgment or that the judgment is collectible. Normally, enforcement of the judgment remains for another day. In a legal malpractice action alleging that an attorney failed to timely file suit, a plaintiff is required only to prove the loss of a judgment on a valid claim.””
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.