Fiest v. Steere’s Empirical Analysis
1953
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently November 2012 · most notably Collins v. City Cabs, Inc. (1964), Harvey v. Palmer (1956)
2 federal appellate · 24 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 Union Pacific Railway Co. v. Kindred · Wagner v. Thompson · Finn v. Alexander · Phœnix Insurance v. Haskett · Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Conlon
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Appellant’s claim the trial court erred in permitting appellee to amend his petition, in the manner heretofore indicated, requires little if any attention. Under our code great liberality is allowed in amending and supplementing pleadings (G. S. 1949, 60-759). Moreover, this court has long been committed to the rule that the allowance or denial of requests to amend pleadings are matters over which a trial court has authority to exercise wide discretion and that its action with respect thereto will not constitute reversible error unless it affirmatively appears the amendment allowed or denied is so material that it affects the substantial rights of the adverse party and constitutes a clear abuse of judicial discretion. (See Barton v. Hackney, 170 Kan. 197 , 224 P. 2d 995 ; Flaharty v. Reed, 170 Kan. 215 , 225 P. 2d 98 ; also G. S. 1949, 60-760.)””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ ‘To obtain an easement for a private way by prescription, the use of such private way must be substantially such a use as, if applied to land, would give title by adverse occupancy. It must have been continuous, exclusive to tire extent the nature of the use will permit, and adverse. A use under a mere license will not ripen into an easement by prescription.’ [Citation omitted.]””
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.