Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 316 Ark. 341 - Fuller v. State

Fuller v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

38
cited by 38 later decisions
1
states following
November 2025
most recently cited

38 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently November 2025 · most notably Foundation Telecommunications, Inc. v. Moe Studio, Inc. (2000), Crisco v. State (1997)

38 state decisions

2401994200020102020decided

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 Chism v. State · Henry v. Eberhard · Kittler v. State · Jt Jackson v. Arkansas Power & Light Company · Enos v. State

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

  1. “We conclude that Fuller’s post-judgment motion is not analogous to a motion under Rule 50(b), Rule 52(b), or Rule 59(b). We have said that we will look to see what a motion actually is in determining Rule 4 questions such as the one before us. See Jackson v. Arkansas Power & Light Co., 309 Ark. 572 , 832 S.W.2d 224 (1992) (per curiam). It is clear, however, that Fuller’s motion is not a request for amended or additional findings or for a new trial. Nor does it qualify as a request for a judgment NOV, which contemplates a jury verdict.”
    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.