Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 153 N.J. Super. 121 - Gilborges v. Wallace

153 N.J. Super. 121 - Gilborges v. Wallace’s Empirical Analysis

1977

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
2
states following
July 2012
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 4 district · 23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently July 2012 · most notably Brett v. Great American Recreation, Inc. (1996), 200 N.J. Super. 620 - Skripek v. Bergamo (1985)

3 federal appellate · 4 district · 23 state decisions

12019771980199020002010decided

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 Judson v. Peoples Bank & Trust Co. of Westfield · Botta v. Brunner · Weber v. Western Electric Co. · Sattelberger v. Telep · DeSimone v. Greater Englewood Housing Corp. No. 1

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

  1. “we conclude that Dr. Leshner’s opinion that Rosemarie would probably have become a practicing veterinarian was without evidential foundation. Cross-examination developed that there is no veterinary school in the State of New Jersey and only one in the State of Pennsylvania, with consequent grave difficulty of a student from New Jersey obtaining admission to such school. We find no support in the record for the conclusion that Rosemarie would probably have become a veterinarian student or graduate. We therefore consider that the assumption was purely speculative and Dr. Leshner’s opinion both as to the probability that (a) she would become a veterinarian and (b) she would have earned approximately $1,000,000 in that practice was likewise speculative.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “when the presentation of the merits of the action will be subserved thereby and the party who obtained the admission fails to satisfy the court that withdrawal or amendment will prejudice him in maintaining his action or defense on the merits.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “withdrawal or amendment of the admission,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.