Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 445 NE2D 579 - Hepp v. Hammer

Hepp v. Hammer’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
March 2006
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Exxon Corp. v. Department of Revenue of Wisconsin · 83 Ind. App. 456 - In Re Perry · 180 Ind. App. 253 - Skolnick v. State · Robinson v. Board of Commissioners · Sturgis v. Rogers

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.

  1. “control the proceedings, to make defense, to adduce and cross-examine witnesses, and to appeal from the decision.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Our trial rules provide only one method by which one not named a party to an action may become an active litigant.”
    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.