Smith v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently March 2016
13 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 Harden v. State · Schmidt v. Wilkinson · Soike v. Evan Matthews and Co. · American National Bank v. Sivers · Bickford v. American Interinsurance Exchange
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The petition need not allege ultimate facts that support the elements of the cause of action. However, the petition must allege enough facts to give the defendant “fair notice” of the claim asserted so the defendant can adequately respond. A petition gives “fair notice” if it informs the defendant of the incident giving rise to the claim and of the claim’s general nature.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“A person commits an assault when, without justification, the person does ... Any act which is intended to cause pain or injury to, or which is intended to result in physical contact which will be insulting or offensive to another, coupled with the apparent ability to execute the act.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Wilker v. Wilker
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.