Loewen v. Hyman Freightways, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently April 2012 · most notably Walther v. KPKA Meadowlands Ltd. Partnership (1998), Orth v. Stoebner & Permann Construction, Inc. (2006)
25 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 Caldwell v. John Morrell & Co. · Day v. John Morrell & Co. · Egemo v. Flores · Helms v. Lynn's, Inc. · Schuck v. John Morrell & Co.
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Every injured employee or his representative shall immediately upon the occurrence of an injury or as soon thereafter as practicable give or cause to be given to the employer written notice of the injury and the employee shall not be entitled to a physician’s fee nor to any compensation which may have accrued under the terms of this title prior to the giving of such notice, unless it can be shown that the employer, his agent, or representative had knowledge of the injury or death, or that the person required to give such notice had been prevented from doing so by reason of physical or mental incapacity or the fraud or deceit of some third person or other equally good reason; but no compensation shall be payable unless written notice is given within thirty days after the occurrence of the injury or death unless reasonable excuse is made to the satisfaction of the department for not giving such notice.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[T]he Department is in the best position to assess the credibility of the witness and the weight to be accorded their testimony, and we give due regard to its opportunity to observe the witnesses and the evidence first hand. [Petersen, 515 N.W.2d at 235 ]; Wendel v. Domestic Seed & Supply, 446 N.W.2d 265, 271 (S.D.1989). We will not substitute our judgment for the agency’s on an issue of credibility unless we are “left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.” Lien v. Miracle Span Corp., 456 N.W.2d 563, 565 (S.D.1990).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“We note the facts of this case illustrate the purpose of the notice requirement and that is ‘to give the employer opportunity to investigate the injury while the facts are accessible. The notice requirement protects the employer by assuring he is alerted to the possibility of a claim so that a prompt investigation can be performed.’”
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.