Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 267 Kan. 369 - Calver v. Hinson

Calver v. Hinson’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
1
states following
December 2023
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently December 2023 · most notably Unruh v. PURINA MILLS, LLC (2009), Smith v. Kansas Gas Service Co. (2007)

2 federal appellate · 26 state decisions

1801999200020102020decided

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 State v. Mincey · Fusaro v. First Family Mortgage Corp. · T.S.I. Holdings, Inc. v. Jenkins · McCullough v. Bethany Medical Center · Brunner v. Jensen

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

  1. “'When ruling on a motion for directed verdict, the trial court is required to resolve all facts and inferences reasonably to be drawn from the evidence in favor of the party against whom the ruling is sought. Where reasonable minds could reach different conclusions based on the evidence, the motion must be denied. A similar analysis must be applied by an appellate court when reviewing the grant or denial of a motion for directed verdict.'”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “that would have led a reasonable person to discover”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““Rule 141 is not just fluff — it means what it says and serves a necessary purpose. Contrary to the opinion of [movant’s] counsel, a moving party’s compliance with Rule 141(a) is even more crucial in complex cases than in simple ones. In accordance with the express language of the rule, the district court could not even hear the motion until the moving party was in compliance with the requirements of the rule. On this basis alone, the summary judgment. . . must be reversed.” 235 Kan. at 736 .”
    1 later decision 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.