Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2002 OK 17 - Armstrong v. Unit Drilling

Armstrong v. Unit Drilling’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
April 2016
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on McCormack v. Oklahoma Publishing Co. · Union Indemnity Co. v. Saling · Wilson Drilling Co. v. Beyer · Bill Hodges Truck Co. v. Gillum · Hardy Sanitarium v. Dehart

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

  1. “We further direct, however, that only those medications Respondents paid for during the six years following the 1993 order are covered here. Any additional medications are expressly not covered by this opinion. Armstrong would be required to establish that his condition had changed for the worse and that the change was causally related to his original on-the-job injury as a prerequisite to establishing a right to an order requiring payment for additional medications. Bill Hodges Truck, 1989 OK 86 at ¶ 6 , 774 P.2d 1063 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “was not the sort of service the law authorizes to be awarded without a showing of a change of condition.”
    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.