Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 184 Kan. 340 - Nelson v. Robinson

Nelson v. Robinson’s Empirical Analysis

1959

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
3
states following
July 2019
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently July 2019 · most notably Blair Construction, Inc. v. McBeth (2002), Lewis v. Premium Investment Corp. (2002)

4 federal appellate · 32 state decisions

1401959196019701980199020002010decided

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 Clutter v. Hill · Mingenback v. Mingenback · Freeto v. State Highway Commission · Eberhardt Lumber Co. v. Lecuyer · Ames v. Ames

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

  1. ““In taking this position defendants either overlook or ignore numerous decisions of this court holding (1) that it is a well-settled principle of equity jurisprudence that where a court of equity has obtained jurisdiction of a controversy on any ground it will retain such jurisdiction for the purpose of administering complete relief and doing entire justice with respect to the subject matter [citations omitted]; (2) that a trial court, sitting as a court of equity, is not obliged to render the specific decree prayed for, but may render a decree in accord with its own good judgment or discretion as to what justice demands, in view of the facts pleaded and evidence adduced [citations omitted]; and (3) that in a suit in equity where a court has before it all the property involved, all the parties claiming rights thereto and their respective claims, it should complete the determination of their respective rights and make an appropriate decree so as to avoid future litigation, as far as possible [citations omitted].” 184 Kan. at 344-45 .”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““. . . where a court of equity has obtained jurisdiction of a controversy on any ground it will retain such jurisdiction for the purpose of administering complete relief and doing entire justice with respect to the subject matter (citing cases); ... a trial court, sitting as a court of equity, is not obliged to render the specific decree prayed for, but may render a decree in accord with its own good judgment or discretion as to what justice demands, in view of the facts pleaded and evidence adduced (citing cases); . . . in a suit of equity where a court has before it all the property involved, all the parties claiming rights thereto and their respective claims, it should complete the determination of their respective rights and make an appropriate decree so as to avoid future litigation, as far as possible (citing cases).””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “its own good judgment or discretion as to what justice demands, in view of the facts pleaded and evidence adduced.”
    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.