Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 270 NEB 100 - Malolepszy v. State

Malolepszy v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2005

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
states following
August 2022
most recently cited

26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently August 2022 · most notably Cerny v. Todco Barricade Co. (2007), Cattle Nat. Bank & Trust Co. v. Watson (2016)

26 state decisions

180200520102020decided

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 Keef v. State, Department of Motor Vehicles · Estep v. Georgetown Leather Design · Smith v. Lincoln Meadows Homeowners Ass'n · Currie Ex Rel. Currie v. Chief School Bus Service, Inc. · Bailey v. Lund-Ross Constructors Co.

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

  1. “The clear purpose of § 25-1315(1) is to provide certainty as to when an order disposing of fewer than all claims or parties in a case involving multiple claims or parties is appealable. As the joinder rules in Nebraska have been recently liberalized, thus permitting more numerous combinations of parties and claims, the necessity for such certainty is even more important. Rather than leave an assessment of the status of the trial proceedings to appellate conjecture, we read § 25-1315(1) to require, in cases with multiple claims or parties, an explicit adjudication with respect to all claims or parties or, failing such explicit adjudication of all claims or parties, an express determination that there is no just reason for delay of an appeal of an order disposing of less than all claims or parties and an express direction for the entry of judgment as to those adjudicated claims or parties.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “express direction for the entry of judgment”
    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.