State v. Baker’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 state decisions

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

1. “(i) the party against whom issue preclusion is asserted [was] a party to or in privity with a party to the prior adjudication; (i) the issue decided in the prior adjudication [was] identical to the one presented in the instant action; (fi) the issue in the first action [was] completely, fully, and fairly litigated; and (iv) the first suit . resulted in a final judgment on the merits.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Willey v. Bugden

2. “Defendant did not identify what potentially mitigating evidence-not already before the trial court-a psychosexual evaluation would have revealed that might have affected the trial court's decision.. ..”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 2012 UT App 34 - State v. Brooks

3. “Collateral estoppel, otherwise known as issue preclusion, prevents parties or their privies from relitigating facts and issues in the second suit that were fully litigated in the first suit.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Willey v. Bugden