Jensen v. Doherty’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently January 2010
16 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
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866)
Relies on Minich v. Gem State Developers, Inc. · Clarence Marshall, Jr. v. Allyn R. Sielaff · Dawson v. Mead · Drake v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. · Pichon v. L. J. Broekemeier, Inc.
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Involuntary dismissal under I.R.C.P. 41(b) for failure to prosecute is in the nature of a sanction. It is a necessary final recourse available to the Court to protect its processes and other litigants from abuse. It is a remedy to be sparingly used, but it is always available. (Citations omitted). "We have held that the granting of an involuntary dismissal on this ground is an act within the sound discretion of the trial court, and that imposition of the sanction will stand absent abuse of that discretion."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“In addition, it must be noted that the appellant has here failed to comply with a number of provisions of the Idaho Appellate Rules governing presentation of appeals to this court. For example, the appellant's brief fails to set forth either the facts involved in this case or the proceedings had below. The brief also fails to denominate any issues on appeal. See I.A.R. 35. And, appellant fails to provide a sufficient record or any argument concerning the propriety of the involuntary dismissal of his action. Absent compliance with the appellate rules, the court will not review the record for error. Error is never presumed on appeal; the burden of showing it is upon the party alleging it. Woods v. Crouse, 101 Idaho 764 , 620 P.2d 798 (1980); Dawson v. Mead, 98 Idaho 1, 3 , 557 P.2d 595 (1976); Clear v. Marvin, 86 Idaho 87, 92 , 383 P.2d 346 (1963). Jensen, supra, 101 Idaho at 911, 623 P.2d at 1288 .”
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.