148 Ind. App. 508 - Klinger v. CAYLOR’s Empirical Analysis
1971
Citation profile
40 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently October 2008 · most notably 151 Ind. App. 217 - Dudley Sports Co. v. Schmitt (1972), Woodward Insurance, Inc. v. White (1982)
40 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 Brunswick Corp. v. Vineberg · 144 Ind. App. 111 - Mayhew, Huston v. DEISTER · Subin v. Goldsmith · 145 Ind. App. 542 - Doe v. Barnett · New York, Chicago & St. Louis Railroad v. Henderson
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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“_ “The Supreme Court and this court have said many times before that the purpose of a summary judgment is to allow the trial court to determine, without litigation, the existence of genuine material issues of fact and a finding in favor of a moving party is a finding that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. However, it is the burden of the party moving for a summary judgment to show the lack of a genuine issue of fact. It has been held that if there is any doubt as to the existence of a factual issue, then the motion must be resolved in favor of the non-mover. Wozniczka v. McKean (1969), 144 Ind. App. 471 , 247 N. E. 2d 215 ; Newcomb v. Cassidy (1969), Ind. App. 245 N. E. 2d 846 .””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““(C) * * * Summary judgment shall not be granted as of course because the opposing party fails to offer opposing affidavits or evidence, but the court shall make its determination from the affidavits and testimony offered upon the matters placed in issue by the pleadings or such evidence. * * * “(E) * * * When a motion for summary judgment is made and supported as provided in this rule, an adverse party may not rest upon the mere allegations or denials of his pleading, but his response, by affidavits or as otherwise provided in this rule, must set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. If he does not so respond, summary judgment, if appropriate, shall be entered against him * * *””
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.