Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 1998 OK 10 - Nelson v. Nelson

Nelson v. Nelson’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

38
cited by 38 later decisions
1
states following
March 2025
most recently cited

36 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably Herbst v. Sayre (1998), Rivas v. Parkland Manor (2000)

36 state decisions

1501998200020102020decided

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 Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. · Daniels v. Williams · City of Cleburne Texas v. Cleburne Living Center · McGowan v. State of Maryland Gallagher · Zinermon v. Burch

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

  1. “[a] classification is not a prohibited, special law if it establishes a reasonable classification of persons, entities or things, sharing the same circumstances.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “Because litigants are entitled to a fair day in court, policy encourages actions being tried on the merits.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “The substantive component of the due process clause bars certain governmental action despite the adequacy of procedural protections provided. Nelson v. Nelson, 1998 OK 10, n. 26 , 954 P.2d 1219 ; Daniels v. Williams, 474 U.S. 327, 332 , 106 S.Ct. 662 , 88 L.Ed.2d 662 (1986). In determining whether an action violates substantive rights, a balance must be struck between the right protected and the demands of society. Matter of Adoption of J.R.M., 1995 OK 79 , 899 P.2d 1155 ; Youngberg v. Romeo, 457 U.S. 307, 320 , 102 S.Ct. 2452, 2460 , 73 L.Ed.2d 28 (1982).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.