Timmermeyer v. Brack’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

23 state decisions

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

1. ““Summary judgment should not be entered if there remains a genuine issue of a material fact, nor where the opposing party is proceeding with due diligence with his pretrial discovery but has not had an opportunity to complete it.” (Syl. ¶ 1.) (Emphasis added.)”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Tabor v. Lederer · Lawrence v. Deemy

2. ““The district court should not determine factual issues on considering the propriety of a summary judgment, but should search the record for the purpose of determining whether a factual issue exists. Certainly whether a factual issue exists should not be determined from the statements of counsel, seeking summary judgment, as to what certain witnesses will testify to when the testimony is not of record. “The record discloses there are material facts to present which leaves remaining a genuine issue of a material fact. Summary judgment was, therefore, erroneously entered.” 196 Kan. at 484 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Moore v. State Bank of Burden

3. ““Ordinarily a motion for summary judgment should not be granted so long as pretrial discovery remains unfinished. (Smith-Corona Marchant, Inc. v. American Photocopy Equip. Co., 217 F. Supp. 39 [S. D. N. Y. 1963].)” (p. 211.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Tabor v. Lederer