Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 271 Ind. 115 - Salk v. Weinraub

Salk v. Weinraub’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
states following
July 2005
most recently cited

28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently July 2005 · most notably Indiana & Michigan Electric Co. v. Terre Haute Industries, Inc. (1987), Data Processing Services, Inc. v. L.H. Smith Oil Corp. (1986)

28 state decisions

1901979198019902000decided

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 Warren v. Indiana Telephone Co. · 159 Ind. App. 105 - Hunter v. Milhous · Irish v. United States · Yanish v. Barber · Kesler v. Myers

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. “(1) Arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (2) Contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity; (3) In excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of statutory right; (4) Without observance of procedure required by law; or (5) Unsupported by substantial evidence. I.C. 4 — 21.5—6—14(d), -15.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “As a general rule, the requirement of “special findings of fact” or the “relevant facts shown by the record” is taken to mean all the facts necessary for a judgment for the party in whose favor the conclusions of law are rendered. However the trial court need not recite the evidence in detail so long as the ultimate facts found are stated in the findings. (Citations omitted.)”
    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.