Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 295 KAN 452 - Ryser v. State

Ryser v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2012

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
1
states following
March 2020
most recently cited

32 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 29 U.S.C. § 161 (§ 11 of the National Labor Relations Act)

Relies on Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp. · Kansas State Board of Healing Arts v. Foote · Bruch v. Kansas Department of Revenue · Unruh v. PURINA MILLS, LLC · Bergstrom v. Spears Manufacturing Co.

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

  1. ““[w]e first attempt to ascertain legislative intent by reading the plain language of the statutes and giving common words their ordinary meanings. [Citation omitted.] When a statute is plain and unambiguous, we do not speculate as to the legislative intent behind it and will not read into the statute something not readily found in it. But when the statute’s language or text is unclear- or ambiguous, we ‘employ canons of construction, legislative history, or other background considerations to divine the legislature’s intent and construe the statute accordingly.’ [Citations omitted.]” 295 Kan. at 458 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.