Lund v. Mangelson’s Empirical Analysis
1968
Citation profile
4 district · 21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently January 1995 · most notably Long v. Hacker (1994), Anderson v. Service Merchandise Co., Inc. (1992)
4 district · 21 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 Egenberger v. National Alfalfa Dehydrating & Milling Co. · Weston Ex Rel. Weston v. Gold & Co. · Gorman v. World Publishing Co. · Beck v. Ideal Super Markets of Nebraska, Inc. · Sankey v. Williamsen
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.
““A motion for directed verdict or for judgment notwithstanding the verdict must be treated as an admission of the truth of all material and relevant evidence submitted on behalf of the party against whom the motion is directed. Such party is entitled to have every controverted fact resolved in his favor and to have the benefit of every inference that can reasonably be deduced from the evidence. Egenberger v. National Alfalfa Dehydrating & Milling Co., 164 Neb. 704 , 83 N. W. 2d 523 .””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Moats v. Lienemann“The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur proceeds on the theory that, under special circumstances which invoke its operation, the plaintiff is unable to specify the particular act of negligence which caused the injury, but if the petition alleges particular acts of negligence, then the plaintiff, in order to recover, must establish the specific negligence alleged, and the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur cannot be applied. 125 Neb. at 602 , 251 N.W. at 259 .”
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.