Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 156 NW2D 831 - Fuerste v. Bemis

Fuerste v. Bemis’s Empirical Analysis

1968

Citation profile

39
cited by 39 later decisions
9
states following
December 2013
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 1 district · 15 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently December 2013 · most notably Ling v. Jan's Liquors (1985), Gutierrez v. Collins (1979)

6 federal appellate · 1 district · 15 state decisions

140196819701980199020002010decided

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 Babcock v. Jackson · Griffith v. United Air Lines, Inc. · 67 Cal. 2d 551 - Reich v. Purcell · Kilberg v. Northeast Airlines, Inc. · 45 Cal. 2d 421 - Emery v. Emery

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

  1. “in determining the substantive law to be applied to each issue in litigation involving a torts-conflicts question. This is particularly true of the guest statute as the legal significance of the relationship should not shift as the automobile passes from state to state.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The basic premise of the most significant relationships theory is that the court of the forum should apply the policy of the state with the most interest in the litigants and the outcome of the litigation.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The `Most Significant Relationship' in the Conflicts Law of Torts,”
    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.