Womack v. Swan’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

22 state decisions

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

1. “[a]n appellant's assertion of a "fundamental right" does not necessarily persuade this Court to consider the issue for the first time on appeal. Rather, we will recognize an exception to the rule "for an issue that 'is of such a fundamental nature that it must be considered.' " Kordus [ v. Montes ], 2014 WY 146 , ¶ 10, 337 P.3d [1138,] 1141 [ (Wyo. 2014) ] (emphasis added) (quoting Utley v. Lankford ( In re Guardianship of Lankford ), 2013 WY 65 , ¶ 28, 301 P.3d 1092 , 1101 (Wyo. 2013) ). We have "declined to address newly raised issues that present constitutional questions where nothing more is shown to compel the Court's review[,]" Utley , 2013 WY 65 , ¶ 29, 301 P.3d at 1101 ....”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. FH v. State (In re Interest of ECH)

2. “[A] judgment or order which determines the merits of the controversy and leaves nothing for future consideration is final and appealable, and it is not appealable unless it does those things.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Wood v. Wood

3. “In determining whether there has been an abuse of discretion, the ultimate issue is whether or not the court could reasonably conclude as it did.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Bruegman v. Bruegman