Manning v. Allgood’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently April 2011
12 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 Guardiola v. State · Williams v. State · 155 Ind. App. 558 - Burrus v. Silhavy · Gilmore v. State · Harris v. Young Women's Christian Assn. of Terre Haute
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"The Civil Code Study Commission Comments on Ind.Rules of Procedure, Trial Rule 56(E), which may be found at 3 W. Harvey, Indiana Practice at 550 (1970) state: © 'Generally speaking a denial of summary judgment cannot be considered or reviewed on appeal from a judgment rendered on a trial of the merits of the case.' Nevertheless, the specific language of TR. 56(E) clearly reads: 'Denial of summary judgment may be challenged by a motion to correct errors after a final judgment or order is entered.' The language of the trial rule appears to follow appellate review in this situation while the Study Commission apparently determined review would be improper. No Indiana cases have been found in which the trial had occurred and the denial of the summary judgment was raised in the motion to correct errors. Therefore, the clear meaning of the trial rule must take precedence and supersede the comments of the Study Commission. The denial of a summary judgment may be properly appealed to this Court following a trial on the merits and the entry of a final judgment."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The purpose of TR.[gic] 51 is to guarantee counsel the opportunity to make timely objections and to advise both the trial court and the adverse party of the basis for the objection so as to afford the opportunity to correct any error at the trial court level.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Wohlwend v. Edwards““If only part of a deposition is offered in evidence by a party, an adverse party may require him to introduce all of it which is relevant to the part introduced, and any party may introduce any other parts.” (Emphasis added)”
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.