198 W. Va. 601 - Trent v. Cook’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
52 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently June 2013 · most notably 205 W. Va. 519 - DeVane v. Kennedy (1999), 206 W. Va. 691 - Maikotter v. University of West Virginia Board of Trustees/West Virginia University (1999)
52 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 153 W. Va. 813 - Keffer v. Prudential Insurance Company of America · 196 W. Va. 692 - Powderidge Unit Owners Ass'n v. Highland Properties, Ltd. · 183 W. Va. 556 - State Automobile Mutual Insurance v. Youler · 158 W. Va. 314 - Parker v. Knowlton Construction Company, Inc. · 188 W. Va. 81 - Russell v. State Automobile Mutual Insurance
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Ojur review is limited to the record as it stood before the circuit court at the time of its ruling.”); Syl. pt. 2, Trent v. Cook, 198 W.Va. 601 , 482 S.E.2d 218 (1996) (”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“A political subdivision may use public funds to secure insurance with respect to its potential liability and that of its employees for damages in civil actions for injui'y, death or loss to persons or property allegedly caused by an act or omission of the political subdivision or any of its employees, including insurance coverage procured through the state board of risk and insurance management. The insurance may be at the limits for the circumstances, and subject to the terms and conditions that ax-e detei’mined by the political subdivision in its disci'etion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Cases construing the phrase “arising out of the ... use of a motor vehicle” uniformly require that the injured person establish a causal connection between the use of the motor vehicle and the injury. (Citation omitted.) Such causal connection must be more than incidental, fortuitous or but for. The injury must be foreseeably identifiable with the normal use of the vehicle. (Citations omitted.) (Emphasis added.)”
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.