Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 167 Wis. 2d 247 - State v. Whitaker

167 Wis. 2d 247 - State v. Whitaker’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

48
cited by 48 later decisions
1
states following
October 2022
most recently cited

48 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently October 2022 · most notably 2009 WI App 62 - Industrial Risk Insurers & Quad Graphics, Inc. v. American Engineering Testing, Inc. (2009), State v. Jennings (2002)

48 state decisions

2201992200020102020decided

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 Glasser v. United States · Bourjaily v. United States · Missouri v. Continential Insurance Cos. · Austin Products Co. v. Workers' Compensation Insurers Rating Association of Minnesota · 115 Wis. 2d 334 - State v. Pharr

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

  1. “expert testimony is required only if the issue to be decided by the jury is beyond the general knowledge and experience of the average juror.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Nevertheless, we may deviate from Wisconsin Supreme Court precedent when that precedent is based on an interpretation of federal law that is no longer in accord with subsequent decisions by the United States Supreme Court.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “assist[s] the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue.”
    3 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.