283 F. Supp. 295 - Combs v. Chambers’s Empirical Analysis
1968
Citation profile
2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently January 2015
2 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 Conley v. Gibson · Wynne v. Boone · Graff v. Nieberg · Margery G. Huntress v. Estate of Carroll B. Huntress, Deceased, Geneve Huntress · Armour & Co. v. B. F. Bailey, Inc.
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In considering a dismissal for failure to state a cause of action or claim upon which relief can be granted, all facts properly pleaded must be taken as true.” 385 F.2d at 230 . See also Oppenheim v. Sterling, 368 F.2d 516 (10th Cir. 1966), Olpin v. Ideal National Insurance Company, 419 F.2d 1250 (10th Cir. 1969), O’Bryan v. Chandler, 352 F.2d 987 (10th Cir. 1965). In Combs v. Chambers, 283 F.Supp. 295 (N.D.Okl.1968) the Court declared: “It is axiomatic that on a motion to dismiss, the Court must take all facts well pleaded as true and grant the motion only when it appears beyond doubt that plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.” 283 F.Supp. at 296 (emphasis added). See also Wilshire Oil Company of Texas v. Riffe, 409 F.2d 1277 (10th Cir. 1969); Oppenheim v. Sterling, supra; Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41 , 78 S.Ct. 99 , 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. ESTRADA v. KRIZ · ESTRADA v. KRIZ
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.