Berk v. Matthews’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
1,053 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,055 later decisions — most recently March 2026 · most notably State v. Madrigal (2000), State v. Smith (1997)
1,053 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 Blakemore v. Blakemore · State v. Adams · Lorain City School District Board of Education v. State Employment Relations Board · Kunkle v. Kunkle · Kaechele v. Kaechele
Cited together with Blakemore v. Blakemore · In re Jane Doe 1 · State v. Adams · Strickland v. Washington · Seasons Coal Co. v. City of Cleveland
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 1,055 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“connotes more than an error of law or judgment; it implies that the court's attitude is unreasonable, arbitrary or unconscionable.'”
63 later decisions quote this exact passage““Any person called as a juror for the trial of any cause shall be examined under oath or upon affirmation as to his qualifications. * * * “The following are good causes for challenge to any person called as a juror: “(J) That he discloses by his answers that he cannot be a fair and impartial juror or will not follow the law as given to him by the court. “Each challenge listed in this section shall be considered as a principal challenge, and its validity tried by the court.””
9 later decisions quote this exact passage“* * * the determination of whether a prospective juror should be disqualified for cause is a discretionary function of the trial court. Such determination will not be *Page 13 reversed on appeal absent an abuse of discretion.”
5 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.