Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 161 Ariz. 304 - Dunham v. Pima County

Dunham v. Pima County’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
2
states following
June 2024
most recently cited

23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently June 2024

23 state decisions

12019891990200020102020decided

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 Markowitz v. Arizona Parks Board · Coburn v. City of Tucson · Karns v. Emerson Electric Co. · State v. Williams · McKenna v. Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft

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

  1. “We affirmed the summary judgment [in Cobum ] because no fact issue existed on the question of whether the City of Tucson ought to have foreseen the kind of conduct that led to the intersectional collision. Thus, like any decision concerned with the absence, presence, or weighing of evidence of foreseeability of harm, Cobum turns on its unique facts.”
    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.