179 Wis. 2d 574 - Johnson v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

cited by 22 later decisions

states following

May 2019

most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently May 2019

14 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 117 Wis. 2d 605 - Radlein v. Industrial Fire & Casualty Insurance · 160 Wis. 2d 1 - Gonzalez v. Teskey · 52 Wis. 2d 593 - State Ex Rel. Susedik v. Knutson · 155 Wis. 2d 608 - Scott Ex Rel. Ricciardi v. First State Insurance Co. · 117 Wis. 2d 634 - Hester 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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

“[0]ur supreme court has stated that the elements necessary to apply equitable estoppel include fraud or inequitable conduct by the party asserting the statute of limitations and that the aggrieved party failed to commence an action within the statutory period because of reliance on the wrongful conduct.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. 2007 WI App 209 - C. Coakley Relocation Systems, Inc. v. City of Milwaukee · 198 Wis. 2d 347 - Bell v. Employers Mutual Casualty Co.
“litigants must inform themselves of applicable legal requirements and procedures, and they cannot rely solely on their perception of how to commence an action.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. 2004 WI App 218 - Wieting Funeral Home of Chilton, Inc. v. Meridian Mutual Insurance · 198 Wis. 2d 347 - Bell v. Employers Mutual Casualty Co.
“(1) If an action is brought in this state on a foreign cause of action and the foreign period of limitation which applies has expired, no action may be maintained in this state. (2) If an action is brought in this state on a foreign cause of action and the foreign period of limitation which applies to that action has not expired, but the applicable Wisconsin period of limitation has expired, no action may be maintained in this state.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
e.g. 198 Wis. 2d 347 - Bell v. Employers Mutual Casualty Co.

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.