21 Wis. 2d 598 - State v. Chippewa Cable Co.’s Empirical Analysis
1963
Citation profile
37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently June 2005 · most notably 214 Wis. 2d 1 - Milas v. Labor Ass'n of Wisconsin, Inc. (1997), 89 Wis. 2d 610 - Department of Revenue v. Moebius Printing Co. (1979)
37 state decisions
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 State ex rel. Carnation Milk Products Co. v. Emery · State Ex Rel. Cowie v. La Crosse Theaters Co. · Williams v. Journal Co. · A B C Auto Sales, Inc. v. Marcus · Ritholz v. Johnson
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Although the language in the decisions may not have been consistent in every instance, we now hold that a motion to strike an answer or reply, or a portion thereof, as sham, frivolous, or irrelevant, is the equivalent of a demurrer only when all the following propositions are true: (1) The motion is to strike the entire answer or reply, or the whole of one or more defenses separately stated therein. (2) The motion accepts as true for the purpose of the motion all the allegations of fact in the defense attacked and the motion is not supported by affidavits tending to establish facts different from or in addition to those alleged. (3) The only issue raised by the motion is the issue of law, whether the defense attacked states a defense. If a motion to strike fulfils all the foregoing propositions it is the equivalent of a demurrer even though it is not labeled a demurrer and does not expressly specify that the defense attacked does not state a defense. . . .””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“The rule [Wis. Adm. Code sec. Aer 3.01] contemplates that there shall not be a fined denial of an application without a hearing, and the statute provides for judicial review. It seems to us that the commission should have held its hearing long before the answer was served.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“We have held that the doctrine of laches is not applicable to an action by the state to protect a public right,”
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.