Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 230 Neb. 171 - Dunn v. Hemberger

Dunn v. Hemberger’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
3
states following
November 2024
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 24 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently November 2024 · most notably Gottsch v. Bank of Stapleton (1990), Lackman v. Rousselle (1999)

2 federal appellate · 24 state decisions

19019881990200020102020decided

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 Rahmig v. Mosley MacHinery Co. · Reeves v. Assoc. Financial Services Co., Inc. · Krepcik v. Interstate Transit Lines · Edward Bender & Sons v. Ericson Livestock Commission Co. · Krepcik v. Interstate Transit Lines

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

  1. “On a motion for judgment n.o.v., the movant is deemed to have admitted as true all the relevant evidence admitted which is favorable to the party against whom the motion is directed, and, further, the party against whom the motion is directed is entitled to the benefit of all proper inferences deducible from the relevant evidence.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Whenever a motion for directed verdict made at the close of all the evidence is denied or for any reason is not granted, the court is deemed to have submitted the action to the jury subject to a later determination of the legal questions raised by the motion. Within ten days after the reception of a verdict, a party who has moved for a directed verdict may move to have the verdict and any judgment entered thereon set aside and to have judgment entered in accordance with his motion for a directed verdict.... A motion for a new trial may be joined with this motion, or a new trial may be prayed for in the alternative. If a verdict was returned the court may allow the judgment to stand or may reopen the judgment and either order a new trial or direct the entry of judgment as if the requested verdict had been directed.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “An order entering judgment, as provided in section 25-1315.02, or granting or denying a new trial, is an appealable order. The time for and manner of taking such appeal shall be as in an appeal from a judgment, decree, or final order of the district court in a civil action. The Supreme Court on appeal from an order granting a new trial, or upon review of an order denying a new trial in the action in which such motion was made, or an appeal from the judgment, may order and direct judgment to be entered in favor of the party who was entitled to such judgment.”
    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.