Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 19 Kan. App. 2d 264 - Fetzer v. Boling

19 Kan. App. 2d 264 - Fetzer v. Boling’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
2
states following
October 2009
most recently cited

8 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Hughes v. Inland Container Corp. · Angleton v. Starkan, Inc. · 16 Kan. App. 2d 269 - Rodriquez v. John Russell Construction · 17 Kan. App. 2d 195 - Stout v. Stixon Petroleum · Brooks v. Sam Lochner Builders, Inc.

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

  1. ““(2) any employment.. . wherein the employer had a total gross annual payroll for the preceding calendar year of not more than $20,000 for all employees and wherein the employer reasonably estimates that such employer will not have a total gross annual payroll for the current calendar year of more than $20,000 for all employees, except that no wages paid to an employee who is a member of the employer’s family by marriage or consanguinity shall be included as part of the total gross annual payroll of such employer for purposes of this subsection. “(3) any employment . . . wherein the employer has not had a payroll for a calendar year and wherein the employer reasonably estimates that such employer will not have a total gross annual payroll for the current calendar year of more than $20,000 for all employees, except that no wages paid to an employee who is a member of the employer’s family by marriage or consanguinity shall be included as a part of the total gross annual payroll of such employer for purposes of this subsection.” K.S.A. 44-505(a)(2), (3).”
    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.