Harrod v. Irvine’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Steelvest, Inc. v. Scansteel Service Center, Inc. · Scifres v. Kraft · Yeoman v. Com., Health Policy Bd. · Newman v. Newman · City of Louisville v. Louisville Professional Firefighters Ass'n, Local Union No. 345 Ex Rel. Gnagie
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he doctrine of res judicata operates to preclude repetitious actions. Napier v. Jones, 925 S.W.2d 193 (Ky.App.1996). In order to apply res ' judicata, there must be 1) identity of the parties between the two actions, 2) identity of the two causes • of action, and 3) the prior action must have been decided on its merits. Id., at 195 . Claim preclusion, a subpart of res judicata, “bars a party from re-litigating a previously adjudicated cause of action and entirely bars a new lawsuit on the same cause of action.” Yeoman v. Commonwealth, Health Policy Bd., 983 S.W.2d 459, 465 (Ky.1998).”
2 later decisions 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.