Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 394 SW2D 773 - Lebow v. Cameron

Lebow v. Cameron’s Empirical Analysis

1965

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
2
states following
July 2010
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently July 2010

3 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

30196519701980199020002010decided

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 Swiss Oil Corporation v. Hupp · Hughett v. Caldwell County · Shell Oil Co. v. Goodroe · Loeb v. Conley · Cameron v. Lebow

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.

  1. “Our Supreme Court said that “where a contention was not made, if it could or should have been made on appeal, the doctrine of res judicata prevented re-litigation [sic] of the same contention in a subsequent appeal.” Lebow v. Cameron, 394 S.W.2d 773, 778 (Ky.1965) (Citation omitted). This is essentially an expression of the law of the case doctrine.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.