Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 492 N.E.2d 337 - Scott v. Gatson

Scott v. Gatson’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
2
states following
February 2017
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently February 2017

2 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

501986199020002010decided

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 Galbreath v. City of Indianapolis · Delaware County v. Powell · City of Indianapolis v. Satz · Mills v. American Playground Device Co. · Board of Aviation Commissioners v. Hestor

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

  1. ““[W]e see no need to endorse a policy which renders the statute a trap for the unwary where such purpose has in fact been satisfied.” Galbreath v. City of Indianapolis (1970) 253 Ind. 472 , 255 N.E.2d 225, 229 . (Emphasis in the original).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “a plaintiff has made a good faith attempt to present a claim to a political subdivision; the political subdivision has referred the matter to an agent (here a claims adjuster) for further investigation; communications between the plaintiff and the agent have ensued; then, upon expiration of the 180 day notice period the political subdivision claims that the plaintiff has failed to comply with the technical provisions of notice and seeks to dismiss the claim.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““[T]o hold that the notice was defective because of its mode of delivery when the notice was received and the purpose of either hand delivery or registered or certified mail, that of assurance of receipt, was met, is contrary to logic and defies common sense.””
    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.