Smith v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
1891
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 86 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 94 later decisions — most recently April 2014 · most notably Title Ins. and Trust Co. v. Ingersoll (1910), Brady v. Times-Mirror Co. (1895)
2 federal appellate · 86 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 LeBreton v. Superior Court of San Francisco · Ashurst v. Gibson
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 94 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“questions remain as to whether the local action doctrine runs to the jurisdiction or the venue of a court”). 3 . Section 392 currently treats as local actions "(1) [f]or the recovery of real property, or of an estate or interest therein, or for the determination in any form, of that right or interest, and for injuries to real property” and “(2) [f]or the foreclosure of all liens and mortgages on real property.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““Section 395 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that ‘in all other cases the action must be tried in the county in which the defendants, or some of them, reside at the commencement of the action’.”
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.