Provencio v. Price’s Empirical Analysis
1953
Citation profile
28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently February 1980 · most notably Michael v. Bauman (1966), Yrisarri v. Wallis (1966)
28 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 Imperator Realty Co. v. . Tull · Alexander v. Cleland · Kingston v. Walters · Kingston v. Walters · Cullender v. Doyal
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The statement of facts required by rule 15, subd. 14(3), our rules of appellate procedure, to be incorporated in an appellant’s brief, if the issue is tried to the court, relate to the ultimate facts found in the decision of the court, Cullender v. Doyal, 44 N.M. 491 , 105 P.2d 326 , which possibly can be better stated in narrative form rather than merely copying the findings into the brief. * * *»”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hopkins v. Martinez““New Mexico cases dealing with the subject, where validity of the oral modification is upheld, seem generally and in truth in every instance to rest upon some element of estoppel disclosing prejudice to avoid the bar of the statute. (Citing cases.)” [ 57 N.M. 40 , 253 P.2d 584 .]”
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.