5 Kan. App. 2d 724 - Eckdall v. Negley’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently January 2001
6 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 3 Kan. App. 2d 162 - Coleman v. Brotherhood State Bank · 1 Kan. App. 2d 525 - Scheuler v. Aamco Transmissions, Inc. · Lutz v. Peine · 1 Kan. App. 2d 254 - Johnson v. Meade
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Since we find no error as to damages, that portion of the judgment is affirmed. [Citations omitted.] The question of apportionment of fault is reversed, and the case is remanded to the trial court for a new trial limited to the question of apportionment of fault. The trial court shall then apply the percentage of fault found by the trier of fact to the amount of damages affirmed in this case and enter judgment accordingly.” 5 Kan. App. 2d at 728 .”
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.