Davidson v. Denning’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 11 district · 43 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 76 later decisions — most recently April 2024 · most notably Martin v. Naik (2013), Pwp v. Ls (1998)
6 federal appellate · 11 district · 43 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 Micheaux v. Amalgamated Meatcutters & Butcher Workmen of North America, Local P-94 · Hecht v. First National Bank & Trust Co. · Friends University v. W. R. Grace & Co. · Gilger v. Lee Construction, Inc. · Stephens v. Snyder Clinic Ass'n
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 76 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“means that a plaintiff has the obligation to reasonably investigate available sources that contain the facts of the [injury] and its wrongful causation.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The term ‘reasonably ascertainable’ implies some obligation to investigate the factual sources available after a tragic death. The limitations period should start on the date of death unless the information from which the fact of death or negligence can be determined was either concealed, altered, falsified, inaccurate, or misrepresented. The fact of death should be a ‘starting point for inquiry.’ The wrongful death plaintiff is charged with constructive knowledge of information that is available through a reasonable investigation of sources that contain the facts of death and its wrongful causation. “ ‘Reasonably ascertainable’ does not mean ‘actual knowledge.’ . . . “The discovery rule, as codified at K.S.A. 60-513(b) and (c), states that the limitations period starts when the ‘fact of injury’ is ‘reasonably ascertainable.’ The phrase ‘reasonably ascertainable’ means that a plaintiff has the obligation to reasonably investigate available sources that contain the facts of death and its wrongful causation.” Davidson, 259 Kan. at 678-79 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“an objective standard based on an examination of the surrounding circumstances.”
2 later decisions 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.