160 Ind. App. 464 - State v. Kushner’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

25 state decisions

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

1. “"Thus, the Supreme Court has interpreted Rule AP. 4(A) to mean that if a trial court grants or denies a motion to correct errors which is accompanied by a new entry or judgment consisting of additional findings, amendments, or other alterations of the prior judgment, the party aggrieved thereby must file a motion to correct errors addressed to the new entry which has become the final judgment from which appeal is taken. With this interpretation we agree, not only because we are bound to do so, but because it logically stresses the need for specificity of alleged errors in the appeal process. The first sentence of Rule AP. 4(A) referring to appeals `from all final judgments' as well as the second sentence denominating a ruling on a motion to correct errors as a final judgment, is thus given force and effect." (Footnote omitted.)”

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 168 Ind. App. 651 - Campbell v. Mattingly · 161 Ind. App. 24 - Easley v. Williams

2. “"This Court reads Deprez to mean that if the trial court, in ruling on the motion to correct errors, does anything other than simply granting or denying the motion, that ruling becomes a new judgment to which a new motion to correct errors must be directed. Therefore, any amendment of a judgment creates a new judgment which requires a motion to correct errors."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 164 Ind. App. 583 - Miller v. Mansfield

3. “"This new entry for the first time set forth the reasons in fact and in law upon which the trial court's dismissal was based. If they were in error, then a Motion to Correct Errors was clearly necessary."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 164 Ind. App. 56 - Hansbrough v. Indiana Revenue Board