Zahn v. Musick’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently February 2025
22 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 Baker v. Jewell · Weidner v. Lineback · Baxter v. Gannaway · Stormo v. Strong · Nelson v. Nelson Cattle 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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“gathering and procuring evidence or bringing the matter to trial.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“1.Whether the trial court abused its discretion when it issued the verdict form instructing the jury to subtract $25,000 from Kern’s total damages. 2. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by excluding the letter from Kern’s counsel in response to Dr. Segal’s report. 3. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by excluding Kern’s proposed other acts evidence. 4. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by quashing the trial sub: poenas of John Charles Jones and Scott Krank. 5. Whether the trial court erred in refusing to award attorney fees under SDCL 58-12-3. 6. Whether the trial court erred by refusing to grant Kern’s motion for judgment as a matter of law or a new trial. Analysis [¶ 14.] 1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion when it issued the verdict form instructing the jury to subtract $25,000 from Kern’s total damages.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“In reviewing a jury award ... “[i]f the jury’s verdict can be explained with reference to the evidence, rather than by juror passion, prejudice or mistake of law, the verdict should be affirmed.” Thus, “if a verdict is susceptive to more than one construction, the construction which sustains the verdict must be applied.” Neither the trial court nor this [C]ourt may set aside a verdict unless it is clearly “unreasonable, arbitrary and unsupported by the evidence.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Welch v. Haase
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.