Foster v. Leggett’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently September 2017 · most notably Combs II Cta II v. International Insurance Company (2004), Hataway v. McKinley (1992)
8 federal appellate · 10 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 Wessling v. Paris · Arnett v. Thompson
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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Upon further study and reflection the court has decided that the conflicts question should not be determined on the basis of a weighing of interests, but simply on the basis of whether Kentucky has enough contacts to justify applying Kentucky law. Under that view if the accident occurs in Kentucky ... there is enough contact from that fact alone to justify applying Kentucky law. Likewise, if the parties are residents of Kentucky and the only relationship of the case to another state is that the accident happened there (as in Wess-ling), there is enough contact with Kentucky to justify applying our law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“opens Kentucky as a forum which will instantly apply its own law upon any excuse whatever, regardless of policy considerations of sister states to the contrary.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“if the accident occurs in Kentucky ... there is enough contact from that fact alone to justify applying Kentucky law.”
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.