Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 164 KAN 461 - Springer v. O'Brien

Springer v. O'Brien’s Empirical Analysis

1948

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
March 1963
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Sluss v. Brown-Crummer Investment Co. · Pfannenstiel v. Doerfler · Anderson v. Southern Surety Co. · Turner v. Jarboe · Fetzer & Co. v. Williams

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

  1. ““. . . As the decisions above noted indicate, generally inconsistent causes of action cannot be united and from those decisions it may be deduced that the main test of inconsistency is repugnancy and contradictoriness, as distinguished from the statement in the form of different causes of what is essentially only one cause of action, and that whether there is repugnancy or contradictoriness is determined by the general test, does proof of one cause disprove the other.” (pp. 464, 465.) (Emphasis added.)”
    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.