Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 973 F.2d 1564 - Huston v. Ladner

Huston v. Ladner’s Empirical Analysis

973 F.2d 1564 · 1992

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
May 2007
most recently cited

Relationships

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Link v. Wabash Railroad · Douglas v. Alabama · Hill v. Lockhart · Ac Aukerman Company v. Rl Chaides Construction 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Petitioner voluntarily chose this attorney as his representative in the action, and he cannot now avoid the consequences of the acts or omissions of this freely selected agent. Any other notion would be wholly inconsistent with our system of representative litigation, in which each party is deemed bound by the acts of his lawyer-agent and is considered to have ‘notice of all facts, notice of which can be charged upon the attorney.’ Smith v. Ayer, 101 U.S. [(11 Otto)] 320, 326 [ 25 L.Ed. 955 (1879) ].”
    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.