Cunningham v. Werntz’s Empirical Analysis
303 F.2d 612 · 1962
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently June 1998
1 federal appellate · 3 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 Whitaker, Admr. v. Borntrager · New York Cent. RR Co. v. JOHNSON, ADMX., ETC. · Novak, Admx., Etc. v. Chi. & C. Dist. Tr. Co. · Hubble v. Brown · 106 Ind. App. 443 - Shipley, Admr. v. Daly
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“When the death of one is caused by the wrongful act or omission of another, the personal representative of the former may maintain an action therefor against the latter... The remainder of the damages, if any, shall ... inure to the exclusive benefit of the widow or widower, as the case may be, and to the dependent children, if any, or dependent next of kin If such decedent depart this life leaving no such ... dependent next of kin, surviving her or him, the damages inure to the exclusive benefit of ... the undertaker for the necessary and reasonable funeral and burial expenses, and to the personal representative, as such, for the necessary and reasonable costs and expenses of administering the estate and prosecuting or compromising the action, including a reasonable attorney’s fee, and in case of a death under such circumstances, and when such decedent leaves no such ... dependent next of kin, surviving him or her, the measure of damages to be recovered shall be the total of the necessary and reasonable value of such ... funeral expenses, and such costs and expenses of administration, including attorney fees.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Mehler v. Bennett““. . . The test on this question [of dependency] is whether, considering the evidence and inferences favorable to plaintiff, there is evidence that plaintiff and his wife needed support and that decedent contributed to that need. . . ” [Emphasis added]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Lustick v. Hall
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.