Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2008 SD 85 - Kostel v. Schwartz

Kostel v. Schwartz’s Empirical Analysis

2008

Citation profile

40
cited by 40 later decisions
5
states following
January 2026
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 3 district · 34 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently January 2026 · most notably St. John v. Peterson (2011), Ferebee v. Hobart (2009)

1 federal appellate · 3 district · 34 state decisions

280200820102020decided

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 Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · Kumho Tire Company, Ltd., et al. v. Patrick Carmichael, Etc., et al. · Huddleston v. United States · Jaffee Special Administrator for Allen Deceased v. Redmond · Territory of Guam v. Okada

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

  1. “An abuse of discretion refers to a discretion exercised to an end or purpose not justified by, and clearly against reason and evidence.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[the credibility of a witness may be attacked by any party, including the party calling him”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Specific instances of the conduct of a witness, for the purpose of attacking or supporting his credibility, other than conviction of crime as provided in §§ 19-14-12 to 19-14-16, inclusive, may not be proved by extrinsic evidence. They may, however, in the discretion of the court, if probative of truthfulness or untruthfulness, be inquired into on cross-examination of the witness: (1) Concerning his character for truthfulness or untruthfulness; or (2) Concerning the character for truthfulness or untruthfulness of another witness as to which character the witness being cross-examined has testified.”
    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.