Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 1993 MASSAPPDIV 196 - Kiley v. Dingwell

Kiley v. Dingwell’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
April 2002
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Perry v. Hanover · Rummel v. Peters · Home Savings Bank v. Savransky · Freyermuth v. Lutfy · In Re the New Bedford Child & Family Service to Dispense With Consent to Adoption

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

  1. “It is elementary that a trial judge ‘must pass upon pertinent requests for rulings of law.... in such a way as to make plain that he has not fallen into error,’ Home Savings Bank v. Savaransky, 307 Mass. 601, 603 (1940), and in ‘such a manner that the requesting party can ascertain, for purposes of appeal, whether the judge applied the correct principles of law in deciding the case.’ Petition of New Bedford Child & Family Serv. to Dispense with Consent to Adop., 385 Mass. 482, 491 (1982). A trial judge’s Rule 64[A] duty to rule on a parly’s requests is not satisfied by a general statement of assorted, possible request dispositions.”
    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.