Rehm v. Lenz’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
3 district · 20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently September 2020
3 district · 20 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 Marquay v. Eno · Simmons v. United States · Morgan v. Baldwin · Schoenrock v. Tappe · St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co. v. Love
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“it does not make any difference [whether the act was negligent or intentional] because SDCL 15-2-14.1 provides a two-year statute of limitations for [actions] `whether based upon contract or tort.' Even intentional acts are torts and are included.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“In the absence of fraudulent concealment or the continuing treatment rule, the lawsuit had to be commenced within two years, not three years, of the last act of negligence[.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Knudson v. Hess“practitioner of the healing arts for malpractice, error, mistake or failure to cure, whether based upon contract or tort[.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Knudson v. Hess
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.