Kuiper v. Tarnabine’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 state decisions

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

1. “[An appellate court] applies a de novo standard of review to [a] trial court’s grant or denial of a motion for summary judgment. Moss v. Batesville Casket Co., 935 So.2d 393, 398 [(15)] (Miss.2006) (citing Stuckey v. Provident Bank, 912 So.2d 859, 864 [ (80) ] (Miss.2005)). A motion for summary judgment “shall” be granted by a court “if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” Miss. R. Civ. P. 56(c). “Summary judgment is mandated where the respondent has failed ‘to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party’s case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial.’ ” Smith ex rel. Smith v. Gilmore Memorial Hosp., Inc., 952 So.2d 177, 180 [ (9) ] (Miss.2007) (quoting Wilbourn v. Stennett, Wilkinson & Ward, 687 So.2d 1205, 1214 (Miss.1996)).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Schiff v. MAO, INC. · 42 So. 3d 511 - Simmons Law Group, P.A. v. Corporate Management, Inc.