Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 417 NW2D 843 - Quick v. Fischer

Quick v. Fischer’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
June 2024
most recently cited

10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently June 2024

10 state decisions

3019881990200020102020decided

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 Frandson v. Casey · Knauss v. Miles Homes, Inc. · Braatelien v. Burns

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

  1. ““An application to intervene under NDRCivP 24 must be timely. A post-judgment motion is not necessarily untimely. ‘Intervention after judgment is unusual and not often granted.’ 3B, Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 24.13, p. 24-154 (1987). ‘There is considerable reluctance on the part of the courts to allow intervention after the action has gone to judgment and a strong showing will be required of the applicant.’ 7C, C. Wright, A. Miller & M. Kane, Federal Practice and Procedure: Civil 2d, § 1916, p. 444 (1986). ‘The court must weigh the lapse of time in the light of all the circumstances of the case.’ Id., at 426....””
    2 later decisions 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.