Dartt v. Berghorst’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 district · 30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently August 2019 · most notably Kuper v. Lincoln-Union Electric Co. (1996), Bauman v. Auch (1995)
1 federal appellate · 2 district · 30 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 Dwyer v. Christensen · Albers v. Ottenbacher · Drier v. Perfection, Inc. · Waddell v. Dewey County Bank · Haggar v. Olfert
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`judicial mind, in view of the law and the circumstances of the particular case, could reasonably have reached such a conclusion.'”
6 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Rogen v. Monson · Junge v. Jerzak“Our standard of review of the circuit court's denial of a directed verdict and of the jury's determination in favor of [the] plaintiff is well established. We must examine the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party and give him the benefit of all reasonable inferences. The moving party is entitled to evidentiary consideration only where its evidence is uncontradicted or tends to amplify, clarify or explain the evidence in support of the verdict of the jury for the prevailing party. In such a context, it becomes our task to review the record and determine whether there is any substantial evidence to allow reasonable minds to differ. This court does not weigh the evidence and substitute its judgment for that of the jury. The decision of the jury is likely to be upheld as questions of negligence ... are for the determination of the jury in all except the rarest of instances. (Quotations and citations omitted.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“An ordinance of the City of Sioux Falls provides in part: Every bicycle driven upon any street, recreation trail or sidewalk during the period from a half-hour after sunset to a half-hour before sunrise and at any other time when there is not sufficient light to render clearly discernible any person at a distance of five hundred feet ahead, shall be equipped with a lighted front lamp exhibiting a white light visible from a distance of at least five hundred (500) feet to the front [[Image here]] This ordinance sets the standard of care of the ordinarily careful and prudent person. If you find a party violated it, such violation is negligence.”
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.