Hammerschmidt v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently August 2010
12 state decisions
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 21 Wis. 2d 182 - Pierringer v. Hoger · 129 N.J. Super. 192 - Markey v. Skog · Employers Mutual Casualty Co. v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co. · Gustafson v. Johnson · American Automobile Insurance v. Molling
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]t would be patently inequitable to allow an injured plaintiff to select arbitrarily, whether intentionally or inadvertently, which of several tortfeasors should be burdened with the entire obligation for a wrongful act by delaying notice until there is little, if any, time to seek out joint tortfeasors. Such a plaintiff could eliminate the right of contribution before the primary claim is asserted or the contribution claim is known. The rights of the contribution claimant would be “dependent on the whim of the injured person.” [citation omitted]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Even though a joint tortfeasor may subsequently acquire a particular defense against an injured party, that tortfeasor may still be held liable to a co-tortfeasor for contribution. * * * * * * However, in all of these cases the defenses were procedural in nature and did not go to the merits of the case. The defenses * * * do not deny liability, but rather avoid liability. Thus, the underlying common liability was never extinguished and a joint tortfeasor's right to contribution was allowed.”
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.