Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 147 NEB 620 - Schwabauer v. State

Schwabauer v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1946

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
2
states following
April 1996
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently April 1996

12 state decisions

60194619501960197019801990decided

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 Hassmann v. City of Bloomfield · Mook v. City of Lincoln · Kaffenberger v. Iverson

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

  1. “(a) The burden of proof in contested cases involving injuries which occur over a substantial period of time is on the employee to make proper proof of his claim by a preponderance of the evidence, and to also prove by competent medical authority that his claim arose out of and in the course of his employment, by showing by a preponderance of evidence that: "(i) There is a direct causal connection between the condition or circumstances under which the work is performed and the injury; "(ii) The injury can be seen to have followed as a natural incident of the work as a result of the employment; "(iii) The injury can fairly be traced to the employment as a proximate cause; "(iv) The injury does not come from a hazard to which employees would have been equally exposed outside of the employment; and "(v) The injury is incidental to the character of the business and not independent of the relation of employer and employee.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “If a claimant has adduced competent evidence having probative value which preponderantly convinces the trier or triers of the fact that claimant had an accident and incurred a disability arising out of and in the course of his employment, notwithstanding the trier or triers of the fact may recognize a possibility or even a probability that this was not true, an award of compensation thereon is proper and on appeal therefrom must be sustained.”
    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.