Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 387 P.2d 294 - Patrick v. Sedwick

Patrick v. Sedwick’s Empirical Analysis

1963

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
2
states following
August 1993
most recently cited

4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently August 1993

4 state decisions

201963197019801990decided

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 Leonidakis v. International Telecoin Corp. · Edwards v. Franke · Stokes v. Van Seventer · In Re Mountain View Public Utility District No. 1 · City of Fairbanks v. Schaible

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

  1. “A review shall not be a matter of right, but will be granted only: (1) where the order or decision sought to be reviewed is of such substance and importance as to justify deviation from the normal appellate procedure by way of appeal and to require the immediate attention of this Court; (2) where the sound policy behind the general rule of requiring appeals to be taken only from final judgments is outweighed by the claim of the individual case that justice demands a present and immediate review of a particular non-appealable order or decision; or (3) where the superior court has so far departed from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings, or so far sanctioned such a departure by an inferior court or administrative tribunal, as to call for this court’s power of supervision and review.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “I am convinced that the issues on damages were not adequately presented. This may be so because of the difficult questions of liability which were raised and because of the course of my decision. Therefore, I have decided to separate the issues on damages from the questions of liability. IT IS ORDERED that the motions for a new trial are denied on all issues of liability, but a new trial on the issues of damages is appropriate. Therefore, this matter shall be set down for further hearing on the damage issues only.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Since the damages issue has not been adjudicated, neither the memorandum opinion nor the order of October 11, 1962, constituted a final judgment or order and, therefore, the appeal was premature.”
    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.