Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 300 P.3d 953 - Vanderpool v. Loftness

Vanderpool v. Loftness’s Empirical Analysis

2012

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
July 2017
most recently cited

6 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore · Blonder-Tongue Laboratories, Inc. v. University of Illinois Foundation · Taylor v. Sturgell · Pomeroy v. Waitkus · Jean Alexander Cosmetics, Inc. v. L'Oreal USA, 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.

  1. “(1) the issue sought to be precluded is identical to an issue actually and necessarily determined in the prior proceeding; (2) the party against whom estoppel is asserted has been a party to or is in privity with a party to the prior proceeding; (8) there is a final judgment on the merits in the prior proceeding; and (4) the party against whom the doctrine is asserted had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue in the prior proceeding.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “does not transform the court into an advocate for either party, nor does it relieve parties of the obligation to bring objections to the court's attention to preserve matters for appellate review.”
    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.