Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2000 ND 219 - Pfeifle v. Tanabe

Pfeifle v. Tanabe’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
4
states following
February 2026
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 3 district · 20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently February 2026 · most notably WFND, LLC v. Fargo Marc, LLC (2007), ATC Partnership v. Town of Windham (2004)

1 federal appellate · 3 district · 20 state decisions

130200020102020decided

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 Dangerfield v. Markel · Hofmann v. Stoller · Wachter v. Gratech Co., Ltd. · R & D AMUSEMENT CORP. v. Christianson · Hanson v. Cincinnati Life Insurance 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.

  1. “`A waiver occurs when a person voluntarily and intentionally relinquishes a known right or privilege.'”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “A finding of fact is clearly erroneous under N.D.R.Civ.P. 52(a) if it is not supported by any evidence, if, although there is some evidence to support the finding, a reviewing court is left with a definite and firm conviction a mistake has been made, or if the finding is induced by an erroneous conception of the law.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “the parties' intent is the preeminent factor in analyzing whether an item is a trade fixture”
    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.