Smith v. Krutar’s Empirical Analysis
1969
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 48 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently June 2014 · most notably Crncevich v. Georgetown Recreation Corporation (1975), Skelton Ranch, Inc. v. Pondera County Canal & Reservoir Co. (2014)
4 federal appellate · 48 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 Spackman v. Ralph M. Parsons Co. · Spencer v. Robertson · Hustad v. Reed · King v. Schultz · Galiger v. Hansen
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he conduct must be done ... at least with the expectation, that it will be acted upon by the other party, or under circumstances that it is both natural and probable that it will be so acted upon.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Developing case law in this state provides three basic prerequisites for establishing adverse user: (1) that the claimant used water at a time when the plaintiff had need of it; (2) that he used it in such a substantial manner as to notify plaintiff that it was being deprived of water to which it was entitled; and (3) that during all of that period, plaintiff could have maintained an action against him for so using the water. (Citing King v. Schultz (1962), 141 Mont. 94, 101 , 375 P.2d 108, 111 .)””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“* * * there can be no recovery of exemplary or punitive damages unless the plaintiff is entitled to actual damages.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. McNeil v. Currie
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.