Rogers v. Rogers’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently January 2007
14 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 Hanks v. Hanks · Johnson v. Johnson · Davis v. Interstate Motor Carriers Agency · Blare v. Blare · Ackerman v. Burgard
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“On motion and upon such terms as are just, the court may relieve a party or his legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons: (1) Mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) Newly discovered evidence which by due diligence could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under § 15 — 6—59(b); (3) Fraud (whether heretofore denominated intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party; (4) The judgment is void; (5) The judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged, or a prior judgment upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer equitable that the judgment should have prospective application; or (6) Any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“On motion and upon such terms as are just, the court may relieve a party or his legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons: [[Image here]] (4) The judgment is void; [[Image here]] (6) Any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The terms, ‘mistake,’ ‘inadvertence,’ ‘surprise,’ and ‘excusable neglect’ as used in SDCL 15-6-60(b)(l) have no fixed meaning; the question must be determined from the facts and circumstances presented by each case, [citation omitted]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Sutton v. Sutton
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.