Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 237 NW2D 423 - Eakman v. Robb

Eakman v. Robb’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
5
states following
June 2012
most recently cited

34 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently June 2012 · most notably Corwin Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc. v. Westchester Fire Insurance Co. (1979), 8 Ariz. App. 534 - State v. Beers (1968)

34 state decisions

21019751980199020002010decided

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 Shelley v. Kraemer · Wayt v. Patee · Kosel v. Stone · Larson v. Larson · Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. Advance Realty 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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““4. A finding is ‘clearly erroneous’ only when, although there is some evidence to support it, the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made. The mere fact that the appellate court might have viewed the facts differently, if it had been the initial trier of the case, does not entitle it to reverse the lower court. “5. Questions of fact decided by the trial court upon conflicting evidence are not subject to reexamination by the Supreme Court.””
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “". . . Findings of fact shall not be set aside unless clearly erroneous, and due regard shall be given to the opportunity of the trial court to judge of the credibility of the witnesses. . .."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““Findings of fact by the district court, in a case tried upon the facts without a jury, will not be set aside by this Court unless they are clearly erroneous. Rule 52(a), N.D.R.Civ.P. ...””
    2 later decisions 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.