Strack v. Continental Resources, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
2017
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently December 2022
1 federal appellate · 4 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 Amchem Products, Inc. v. Windsor · Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes · Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes · Central Wesleyan College v. W.R. Grace & Co. · United States v. Andreas
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“highly individualized and fact-intensive review of each [class member's] claim,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The question of where and when particular gas is marketable is not settled in Oklahoma. In addition, there is no categorical rule with respect to when post-production costs may be considered for royalty valuation. Mittelstaedt , [¶ 2 ] ("in some cases a royalty interest may be burdened with post-production costs, and in other cases it may not"). Notably, "post-production costs must be examined on an individual basis to determine if they are within the class of costs shared by a royalty interest." Id . [¶ 19 ] (emphasis added); Howell , 2004 OK 92 , ¶ 20, 112 P.3d at 1160 ("[T]he courts must carefully scrutinize the figures to determine the correct amount."). As a result, highly individualized and fact-intensive review of each Class Members' claim would be necessary to determine if [the defendant] underpaid oil or gas royalties. Thus, "[c]ertification is improper [because] the merits of the claim turn on the defendant's individual dealings with each plaintiff." Harvell , 2006 OK 24 , ¶ 27, 164 P.3d at 1038 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Strack , ¶ 29 . This statement and the following conclusion are equally applicable to the present case: 11 The question of where and when particular gas is marketable is not settled in Oklahoma. In addition, there is no categorical rule with respect to when post-production costs may be considered for royalty valuation. Mittelstaedt , [¶ 2 ] (”
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.