Ware v. Ware’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
1 district · 26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently May 2025 · most notably ConocoPhillips Alaska, Inc. v. Williams Alaska Petroleum, Inc. (2014), Osterkamp v. Stiles (2010)
1 district · 26 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 Guin v. Ha · Yohe v. Yohe · Zack v. Guzauskas · Gilbert v. State · Peterson v. Ek
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“While we have occasionally expressed concern about the use of factor (A)-complexity of the litigation-to enhance fees ... we have repeatedly upheld its use.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“if the evidence in the record fails to disclose a genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“a showing that the award was arbitrary, capricious, manifestly unreasonable, or stemmed from improper motive.”
2 later decisions 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.