Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 144 Ind. App. 252 - Moore v. Boxman

144 Ind. App. 252 - Moore v. Boxman’s Empirical Analysis

1969

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
2
states following
February 2011
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently February 2011

8 state decisions

40196919701980199020002010decided

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 Pokraka v. Lummus Co. · Souerdike v. State · Stix v. Sadler · Hamrick v. Loring · Fish v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America

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

  1. ““The matter of permitting the opening of the issues for the purpose of filing additional pleadings and amending pleadings after the issues are closed is within the sound legal discretion of the trial court. Unless it is shown that there has been an abuse of such discretion, with prejudice resulting to appellant, it will be presumed that there was no error.” Moore v. Boxman, (1969) 144 Ind.App. 252, 261 , 245 N.E.2d 866, 871 ; Spangler v. Armstrong Rubber Co., (1962) 133 Ind.App. 411, 413 , 178 N.E.2d 764, 765 .”
    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.