Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2016 ND 135 - State v. Putney

State v. Putney’s Empirical Analysis

2016

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
February 2020
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on State v. Kleppe · B.W.S. Investments v. Mid-Am Restaurants, Inc. · Keller v. Bolding · State v. Hatlewick · State v. Bingaman

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

  1. “A district court abuses its discretion if it acts in an arbitrary, unreasonable, or unconscionable manner, if its decision is not the product of a rational mental process leading to a reasoned determination, or if it misinterprets or misapplies the law.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “State has the burden of proving the amount of restitution by a preponderance of the evidence.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “wide degree of discretion when determining restitution awards.”
    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.