Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 206 Kan. 159 - Hallmark v. Dalton Construction Co.

Hallmark v. Dalton Construction Co.’s Empirical Analysis

1970

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
June 2015
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently June 2015

8 state decisions

4019701980199020002010decided

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 Barten v. Turkey Creek Watershed Joint District No. 32 · State ex rel. Wheat v. Moore · Harris v. Shanahan · Shumaker v. Kansas State Labor Department · State v. Sumner

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

  1. ““(a) Any action of the director pursuant to the workers compensation act shall be subject to review in accordance with the act for judicial review and civil enforcement of agency actions. . . . “(b) On any such review the district court shall have jurisdiction to grant or refuse compensation, or to increase or diminish any award of the director as justice may require. No compensation shall be due or payable until the expiration of the time for commencing an action for review and then the payment of past due compensation awarded by the director shall not be payable if, within such time a petition for review, has been filed in accordance with the act for judicial remew and civil enforcement of agency actions. Except as otherwise provided by this section, the right of review shall include the right to make no payments of such compensation until the review has been decided by the district court if the employer is insured for workers compensation liability with an insurance company authorized to do business in this state, if the employer is maintaining membership in a qualified group-funded workers compensation pool under K.S.A. 44-581 through 44-591 and amendments thereto, if the employer is maintaining membership in a group-funded pool under the Kansas municipal group-funded pool act which includes workers compensation and employers’ liability under the workers compensation act, or if the employer is currently approved by the director as a self-insurer and has filed a bond with ”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.