Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 277 N.W.2d 30 - Kossak v. Stalling

Kossak v. Stalling’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
5
states following
April 2018
most recently cited

20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently April 2018

20 state decisions

15019791980199020002010decided

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 Ross v. Massachusetts · Ex parte Kent · Turner v. Staggs · 85 Wash. 2d 810 - Hunter v. North Mason School Dist. · 160 W. Va. 694 - O'NEIL v. City of Parkersburg

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

  1. “* * * secure to every person the right to be free from arbitrary and intentional discrimination.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “* * * actual notice on the part of the municipality or its responsible officials of sufficient facts to reasonably put the governing body of the municipality on notice of a possible claim will be in compliance with the notice requirements of Minn.St.1971, § 466.05, subd. 1. Our holding today does no more than follow the trend of our recent opinions in recognizing the arbitrariness of the notice provision and in an attempt to remedy this injustice, we declare that substantial compliance is accomplished by actual notice on the part of the municipality even if such knowledge is acquired through its own procedures or personnel.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Even if the commencement of suit requirement furthered a governmental objective, we have great doubt whether there exists a proper basis for distinguishing between a person injured by a vehicle belonging to a municipal corporation and one belonging to a private corporation or anyone else.”
    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.