Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 261 Neb. 846 - Marshall v. Wimes

Marshall v. Wimes’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

40
cited by 40 later decisions
3
states following
September 2020
most recently cited

40 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently September 2020 · most notably State v. Davlin (2002), Hass v. Neth (2003)

40 state decisions

330200120102020decided

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 Mathews v. Eldridge · Bell v. Burson · MacKey v. Montrym · Dixon v. Love · Brock v. Roadway Express, Inc.

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

  1. “limits the ability of the government to deprive people of interests which constitute liberty or property interests within the meaning of the Due Process Clause and requires that parties deprived of such interests be provided adequate notice and an opportunity to be heard. Marshall v. Wimes, 261 Neb. 846 , 626 N.W.2d 229 (2001). The central meaning of”
    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.