Kirk Co. v. Ashcraft’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 50 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently June 2013 · most notably Lambert v. Kysar (1993), State v. Apodaca (1994)
2 federal appellate · 50 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 Palmer v. Hoffman · State v. Ramirez · Mantz v. Follingstad · Archibeque v. Homrich · Matter of Ferrill
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The following are not excluded by the hearsay rule, even though the declarant is available as a witness: F. Records of regularly conducted activity. A ... record ... in any form ... made at or near the time by ... a person with knowledge, if kept in the course of a regularly conducted business activity, and if it was the regular practice of that business activity to make the ... record ..., all as shown by the testimony of the custodian or other qualified witness, unless the source of information or the method or circumstances of preparation indicate lack of trustworthiness.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[i]t is not error to deny requested instructions when the instructions given adequately cover the law to be applied.”
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.