Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2002 UT App 234 - State v. Garner

2002 UT App 234 - State v. Garner’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
1
states following
February 2024
most recently cited

17 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Doggett v. United States · State v. Thomas · State v. Jaeger · MacKay v. Hardy · State v. Arviso

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

  1. “It is well established that Utah appellate courts will not consider claims that are inadequately briefed.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “'The argument shall contain the contentions and reasons of the appellant with respect to the issues presented, including the grounds for reviewing any issue not preserved in the trial court, with citations to the authorities, statutes, and parts of the record relied on.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “State v. Jaeger, 1999 UT 1, ¶ 31 , 973 P.2d 404 (internal quotation marks omitted); see also State v. Garner, 2002 UT App 234, ¶12 , 52 P.3d 467 ('When a party fails to offer any meaningful analysis regarding a claim, we decline to reach the merits.”
    3 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.