Bard Ranch, Inc. v. Weber’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently August 2022
15 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 Stassen for President Citizens Committee v. Jordan · Olga Zdanok v. The Glidden Company, Durkee Famous Foods Division, Frank T. Alexander v. The Glidden Company, Durkee Famous Foods Division · Minnesota v. United States Steel Corp. · MacAlister v. Guterma · Nugent v. Powell
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the word 'consolidation' has different connotations. One of these, which actually is not a consolidation, but is described as such, occurs when all but one of several pending actions are stayed until the trial of the one not stayed, it being determinative as to the others; the second connotation describes the instance in which several actions are combined into one action, lose their separate identity as such, and become a single action in which a single judgment is rendered; and the third connotation describes an instance in which several actions are tried together, but retain their separate character and require the entry of separate judgment. 9 Wright and Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure, s 2382, p, 254 (1971). While both the second and third types of consolidation are contemplated by the language of Rule 42 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Rule 42 of the Wyoming Rules of Civil Procedure, it appears that historically the courts have recognized only the third style of consolidation. *****”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The record in this case ... demonstrates that the rebuilding and concreting of the Cooley Ditch was done by mutual consent of the landowners involved. Under those cireumstances the mere relocation of the right-of-way would not alter the rights of the respective owners. Wallace Ranch Water Co. v. Foothill Ditch Co., 5 Cal.2d 103 , 53 P.2d 929 (1935); Babcock v. Gregg, 55 Mont. 317 , 178 P. 284 (1918). The new concrete ditch would be considered in the same light as the old earthen ditch, and the rights of the parties in it would be exactly the same.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Stipulations are favored by courts. Beard v. Beard, 368 P.2d 953, 955 (Wyo.1962); 83 C.J.S. Stipulations § 2 (1953). See Bard Ranch, Inc. v. Weber, 538 P.2d 24, 31 (Wyo.1975) (citations omitted) stating that “[t]he parties are bound by the stipulation of facts just as they are bound by admissions in pleadings.””
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.