Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 173 WIS2D 263 - Weigel v. Grimmett

Weigel v. Grimmett’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
2
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

22 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently October 2018 · most notably 33 Cal. 4th 61 - Fletcher v. Davis (2004), 197 Wis. 2d 484 - Firstar Trust Co. v. First National Bank of Kenosha (1995)

22 state decisions

120199220002010decided

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 136 Wis. 2d 304 - Green Spring Farms v. Kersten · 97 Wis. 2d 332 - Grams v. Boss · 162 Wis. 2d 737 - Voss v. City of Middleton · 79 Wis. 2d 120 - Hopper v. City of Madison · 93 Wis. 2d 349 - Heck & Paetow Claim Service, Inc. v. Heck

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. “Lien on proceeds of action to enforce cause of action. Any person having or claiming a right of action, sounding in tort or for unliquidated damages on contract, may contract with any attorney to prosecute the action and give the attorney a lien upon the cause of action and upon the proceeds or damages derived in any action brought for the enforcement of the cause of action, as security for fees in the conduct of the litigation; when such agreement is made and notice thereof given to the opposite party or his or her attorney, no settlement or adjustment of the action may be valid as against the lien so created, provided the agreement for fees is fair and reasonable. This section shall not be construed as changing the law in respect to champer-tous contracts.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “(1) examine the pleadings to determine whether the complaint states a claim and an issue of material fact, (2) examine the moving party's affidavits and other proof to determine whether the moving party has made out a prima facie case for summary judgment, and, (3) examine the non-moving party's affidavits and other proof to determine whether there is a dispute over a material fact from which alternative reasonable inferences could be drawn.”
    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.