Park v. Strick’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
32 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently March 2012 · most notably Daou v. Harris (1984), City of Phoenix v. Geyler (1985)
32 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 Klapprott v. United States · Hill v. Hawes · International Controls Corp. v. Vesco · Hensley v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. · Expeditions Unlimited Aquatic Enterprises, Inc. v. Smithsonian Institute
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Rule 77(g) restricts the power of an Arizona trial court to grant Rule 60(c)(6) relief where the only ground is the failure to give or receive the notice required by Rule 77(g). Where, however, an aggrieved party establishes lack of knowledge that judgment has been entered, and asserts additional reasons that are so extraordinary as to justify relief, we hold that the trial court has authority under Rule 60(c)(6) to vacate the judgment and reenter a new judgment in order to allow the party to file a timely appeal. In other words, relief under Rule 60(c)(6) may be considered where the party did not have knowledge from any source that judgment had been entered and where there are extraordinary circumstances. However, where the complaint is only that the party did not have or get the formal noticé to which a party is entitled by Rule 77(g), the relief is not available. To the extent the opinion in Vital is inconsistent with our holding today, it is disapproved.” (emphasis supplied). 137 Ariz. at 104 , 669 P.2d at 82 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Minute Entries; notice of entry of judgments. The clerk shall mail copies of all minute entries to all parties. Immediately upon the entry of a judgment as defined in Rule 54(a), the clerk shall mail a notice of the entry of judgment stating the date of entry, in the manner provided for in Rule 5, to every party who is not in default for failure to appear, and shall make a record of the mailing. Lack of notice of the entry by the clerk does not affect the time to appeal or relieve or authorize the court to relieve a party for failure to appeal within the time allowed.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Daou v. Harris · Daou v. Harris“In Buckeye Cellulose, supra, none of the parties knew that judgment had been entered so none could be said to- have relied on the notice of entry of judgment, plaintiff's counsel made three inquiries of the clerk’s office to determine the status of the case, and counsel acted diligently after learning of the entry of judgment. Under these circumstances, the court of appeals held that the trial court had authority to vacate the judgment ----in order to permit the filing of a notice of appeal, (citations omitted).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Davis v. Davis
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.