Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2004 UT 44 - Shipman v. Evans

Shipman v. Evans’s Empirical Analysis

2004

Citation profile

24
cited by 24 later decisions
1
states following
November 2020
most recently cited

24 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently November 2020

24 state decisions

120200420102020decided

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 20 Cal. 3d 25 - Serrano v. Priest · 32 Cal. 3d 668 - Folsom v. Butte County Assn. of Governments · Robinson v. Kimbrough · Brookside Mobile Home Park, Ltd. v. Peebles · R.T. Nielson Co. v. Cook

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

  1. “Among the methods of granting an equitable award of attorney fees [recognized in Utah] is a doctrine known as the “private attorney general.” Under this doctrine, “[c]ourts ... have awarded attorney fees to a party as a ‘private attorney general’ when the ‘vindication of a strong or socie-tally important public policy’ takes place and the necessary costs in doing so ‘transcend the individual plaintiffs pecuniary interest to an extent requiring subsidization.’ ””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “may properly raise sua sponte the issue of mootness. By doing so, the court acts in furtherance of a core judicial policy to limit the scope of its power to issues in controversy.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “The decision to hold a party in contempt of court rests within the sound discretion of the trial court and will not be disturbed on appeal unless the trial court's action is so unreasonable as to be classified as capricious and arbitrary, or a clear abuse of discretion.”
    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.