Rueth v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
62 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently December 2021 · most notably Perry v. Magic Valley Regional Medical Center (2000), Sun Valley Shamrock Resources, Inc. v. Travelers Leasing Corp. (1990)
62 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 Minich v. Gem State Developers, Inc. · 79 Ill. App. 2d 377 - Watson Lumber Co. v. Guennewig · Tibbs v. City of Sandpoint · Rueth v. State · Jensen v. Bledsoe
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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“This standard of appellate review is salutary in effect, and reflects the view that deference must be afforded to the [trial court's] special opportunity to assess and weigh the credibility of the witnesses who appear before it personally.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Matter of Jenkins · Matter of X“The Department’s argument overlooks the fact that weighing the testimony of expert witnesses is uniquely within the competence of the trier of fact____In this case, the district court’s decision not to follow [the Department’s expert -witness’s] testimony completely, although disappointing to the Department, does not render its findings of fact clearly erroneous. Simply stated, each side’s expert presented differing opinions to the district court based on differing methodologies, and it was within the sound discretion of the district court to accept or reject each expert’s opinions.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“In all actions tried upon the facts without a jury ... [f]indings of fact shall not be set aside unless clearly erroneous.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Matter of Jenkins
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.