Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 267 Kan. 583 - Moran v. State

Moran v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

42
cited by 42 later decisions
1
states following
December 2023
most recently cited

22 district · 20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently December 2023 · most notably Barrett Ex Rel. Barrett v. Unified School District No. 259 (2001), Hall v. Kansas Farm Bureau (2002)

22 district · 20 state decisions

2801999200020102020decided

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 Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. · Hamilton v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. · Micheaux v. Amalgamated Meatcutters & Butcher Workmen of North America, Local P-94 · Nero v. Kansas State University · Hopkins v. State

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

  1. “[d]amages recoverable for defamation, whether per se or not, could no longer be presumed but must be proven.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “'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.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The exceptions to liability of a governmental entity or employee set out in 75-6104 are not without limitations. Only negligent or wrongful acts or omissions of employees are excepted from liability by 75-6104, while acts or omissions involving more than the lack of ordinary care and diligence are not.”
    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.