Baatz v. Arrow Bar’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 5 district · 13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently July 2019
2 federal appellate · 5 district · 13 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 Anderson v. Abbott · Bego v. Gordon · Groseth International, Inc. v. Tenneco, Inc. · Loving Saviour Church v. United States · Hamaker v. Kenwel-Jackson MacHine, Inc.
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) fraudulent representation by corporation directors; (2) undercapitalization; (3) failure to observe corporate formalities; (4) absence of corporate records; (5) payment by the corporation of individual obligations; or (6) use of the corporation to promote fraud, injustice, or illegalities.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[u]nder SDCL 15-6-56(e), the opposing party [must] be diligent in resisting a motion for summary judgment, and mere general allegations and denials which do not set forth specific facts will not prevent the issuance of a judgment.” Even though”
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.