Puklich v. Puklich’s Empirical Analysis
2019
Citation profile
9 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Cavalier Oil Corp. v. Harnett · 43 Del. Ch. 353 - Condec Corporation v. Lunkenheimer Company · Woischke v. Stursberg & Fine, Inc. · In Re Valuation of Common Stock of McLoon Oil Co. · 91 Cal. App. 3d 477 - Brown v. Allied Corrugated Box Co.
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"A finding of fact is clearly erroneous under N.D.R.Civ.P. 52(a), if it is not supported by any evidence, if, although there is some evidence to support the finding, we are left with a definite and firm conviction a mistake has been made, or if the finding is induced by an erroneous conception of the law. See Tornabeni v. Creech , 2018 ND 204 , ¶ 22, 916 N.W.2d 772 . A district court's finding is not clearly erroneous if it represents a choice between two permissible views of the evidence and the finding is based either on physical or documentary evidence, or inferences from other facts, or on credibility determinations. Schultz [v. Schultz , 2018 ND 259 , ¶ 14, 920 N.W.2d 483 ]. A district court's valuations are presumed by this Court to be correct, and a valuation within the range of evidence presented to the court is not clearly erroneous. Id. at ¶¶ 14, 17.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“A district court's valuations are presumed by this Court to be correct, and a valuation within the range of evidence presented to the court is not clearly erroneous.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“'fair value' of minority shares under the Business Corporation Act should not automatically discount their value.”
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.