Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 488 NW2D 885 - Case v. Murdock

Case v. Murdock’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
1
states following
December 2025
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 3 district · 19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently December 2025 · most notably Martinmaas v. Engelmann (2000), Biegler v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co. (2001)

2 federal appellate · 3 district · 19 state decisions

1501992200020102020decided

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 Alberts v. Mutual Service Casualty Insurance Co. · Dahl v. Sittner · Flockhart v. Wyant · Mobridge Community Industries, Inc. v. Toure, Ltd. · General Automotive Manufacturing Co. v. Singer

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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “a positive desire and intention to injure ... another, actuated by hatred or ill will towards that person,”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “a clear and convincing evidence standard to determine, before any such claim may be submitted to discovery or to the jury, whether there is a reasonable basis to believe there has been [] willful, wanton, or malicious conduct on the part of the party claimed against. This statute merely requires clear and convincing evidence to show a reasonable basis. Flockhart v. Wyant, 467 N.W.2d 473, 476 (S.D.1991). Thus, the proponents’ burden is a preliminary, lower-order quantum of proof than must be established at trial. Such proof is a prima facie case for punitive damages. Vreugdenhil v. First Bank of S.D., 467 N.W.2d 756 (S.D.1991).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “In any claim alleging punitive or exemplary damages, before any discovery relating thereto may be commenced and before any such claim may be submitted to the finder of fact, the court shall find, after a hearing and based upon clear and convincing evidence, that there is a reasonable basis to believe that there has been willful, wanton or malicious conduct on the part of the party claimed against.”
    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.