Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 151 Ind. App. 1 - Burcham v. Singer

151 Ind. App. 1 - Burcham v. Singer’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
March 1984
most recently cited

8 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Egbert v. EGBERT · Fair Share Organization v. Mitnick · Pittsburgh, Cincinnati & St. Louis Railway Co. v. Hixon · Kapusta v. DePuy Manufacturing Co. · Soderling v. Standard Oil Co.

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. ““Furthermore, the affidavit in opposition to the motion for summary judgment stated only that there are disputed issues of fact without setting forth ‘specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial’ as required by Rule TR. 56(E), Indiana Rules of Procedure. Such affidavit is not sufficient to show a genuine issue of material fact.””
    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.