Logerquist v. Danforth’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
12 district · 57 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 71 later decisions — most recently April 2020 · most notably Doe v. Roe (1998), Moriarty v. Garden Sanctuary Church of God (2000)
12 district · 57 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 Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · Frye v. United States · Burnett v. New York Central Railroad · Orme School v. Reeves · S.V. v. R.V.
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 71 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“That common law rule, if sufficient evidence supporting its application is presented, may delay commencement of the time period within which suit must be filed. Under the discovery rule, a cause of action accrues “when the plaintiff knew or by the exercise of reasonable diligence should have known of the defendants’ conduct and therefore the statute of limitations does not begin to. run until that time.” Mayer v. Good Samaritan Hosp., 14 Ariz.App. 248 , 482 P.2d 497, 501 (Ariz.1971); See also Vega v. Morris, 184 Ariz. 461 , 910 P.2d 6, 8 (1996). The burden of establishing that the discovery rule applies to delay the statute of limitations rest[s] on plaintiff. Ulibarri v. Gerstenberger, 178 Ariz. 151 , 871 P.2d 698, 702 (Ariz.Ct.App.1993); Cooney v. Phoenix Newspapers, Inc., 160 Ariz. 139 , 770 P.2d 1185, 1187 (Ariz.Ct.App.1989).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Effect of minority or insanity If a person entitled to bring an action other than those [involving real property] ... is at the time the cause of action accrues ... under eighteen years of age ..., the period of such disability shall not be deemed a portion of the period limited for commencement of the action. Such person shall have the same time after removal of the disability which is allowed to others.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Montano v. Browning“[D]etermination of a claim's accrual date [for limitations period] usually is a question of fact, with the inquiry centering on the plaintiff's knowledge of the subject event and resultant knowledge of the subject event and resultant injuries, whom the plaintiff believed was responsible, and plaintiff's diligence in pursuing the claim.”
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.