Sudbury v. Deterding’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently June 2024 · most notably Tulsa Industrial Authority v. City of Tulsa (2011), CNA Insurance Co. v. Ellis (2006)
28 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 Huntington v. Attrill · Special Indemnity Fund v. Figgins · Welch v. Union Mutual Insurance Co. of Providence · Smith v. Colson · Sullivan v. Davis
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“alters the rights or obligations of a party cannot be viewed as solely a remedial or procedural change and cannot be retrospectively applied.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage“that when a statute has been adopted from another state, the judicial construction of that statute by the highest court of the jurisdiction from which the statute is taken accompanies it, and is treated as incorporated.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[the general rule in Oklahoma is that statutes, and amendments, are to be construed to operate only prospectively unless the Legislature clearly expresses a contrary intent.”
2 later decisions 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.