Gillmore v. Morelli’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently April 2014
14 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 Union State Bank v. Woell · Hennebry v. Hoy · Gillan v. Saffell · Martinson v. Raugutt
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““If more than one claim for relief is presented in an action, whether as a claim, counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party claim, or if multiple parties are involved, the court may direct the entry of a final judgment as to one or more but fewer than all of the claims or parties only upon an express determination that there is no just reason for delay and upon an express direction for the entry of judgment. In the absence of that determination and direction, any order or other form of decision, however designated, which adjudicates fewer than all of the claims or the rights and liabilities of fewer than all the parties does not termi nate the action as to any of the claims or parties, and the order or other form of decision is subject to revision at any time before the entry of judgment adjudicating all the claims and the rights and liabilities of all the parties.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“"The claims raised in the main action and counterclaim arose from the same series of transactions and occurrences, are logically related legally and factually, and are closely intertwined. [Citations omitted.] It is likely that an appeal will be taken after the unadjudicated counterclaim is decided, which would involve the same factual situation as the present appeal." [Citations omitted.] Justice Sand further noted, at page 239 of the reported case, that there "were no unusual or compelling circumstances presented to the court which dictated immediate entry of a separate judgment." [2]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Regstad v. Steffes“may affect the decision on the main action and the trial court may make new or additional findings in the main action in light of its decision on the counterclaim.”
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.