Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 214 Kan. 62 - Ebert v. Mussett

Ebert v. Mussett’s Empirical Analysis

1974

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
2
states following
November 1999
most recently cited

36 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently November 1999 · most notably Hopkins v. State (1985), Johnson v. Soulis (1975)

36 state decisions

180197419801990decided

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 Brick v. City of Wichita · Lawrence v. Deemy · Meyer v. Benelli

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

  1. “"... A material fact is one on which the controversy may be determined. The manifest purpose of a summary judgment is to avoid trial where there is no real issue of fact. In considering a motion for summary judgment, the court should not attempt to determine factual issues, but should search the record to determine whether factual issues do exist. Where there is a reasonable possibility of their existence, summary judgment will not lie. The court should give to the party against whom summary judgment is sought the benefit of all inferences that may be drawn from the facts under consideration. (Lawrence v. Deemy, 204 Kan. 299 , 461 P. 2d 770 .)” (1. c. 65.)”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Allegations in pleadings will not sustain a genuine issue of fact when opposed by uncontradicted affidavits supporting a motion for summary judgment.” (Syl. 3.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.