Newell v. Krause’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
34 district · 19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 53 later decisions — most recently July 2008 · most notably Ortega v. IBP, Inc. (1994), Barbara Oil Co. v. Kansas Gas Supply Corp. (1992)
34 district · 19 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 Nordstrom v. Miller · Modern Air Conditioning, Inc. v. Cinderella Homes, Inc. · Augusta Bank & Trust v. Broomfield · Fox v. Wilson · Credit Union of America v. Myers
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 53 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the witnesses to a fact must be found to be credible; the facts to which the witnesses testify must be distinctly remembered; the details in connection with the transaction must be narrated exactly and in order; the testimony must be clear, direct and weighty; and the witnesses must be lacking in confusion as to the facts at issue.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Clear and convincing evidence is not a quantum of proof, but rather a quality of proof; thus, the plaintiff establishes [retaliatory discharge] by a preponderance of the evidence, but this evidence must be clear and convincing in nature.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“On review, this court considers only the evidence of the successful party to determine whether it is substantial and whether it is of clear and convincing quality.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In Re Bd-Y.
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.