Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 106 MINN 339 - Peterson v. Lundquist

Peterson v. Lundquist’s Empirical Analysis

1908

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
4
states following
March 1965
most recently cited

13 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently March 1965

13 state decisions

501908191019201930194019501960decided

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 Erhard v. Wagner

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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““* * * it would be a dangerous rule to hold that a loss of some of the records in a particular case was a good and sufficient reason for granting a new trial. The statutes do not authorize it, and the court should not open the gate to a new field for prolonging litigation.””
    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.