Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 59 KAN 264 - Erb v. Popritz

Erb v. Popritz’s Empirical Analysis

1898

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
2
states following
November 1940
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently November 1940

12 state decisions

60189819001910192019301940decided

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 Atlanta & West Point Railroad v. Smith · In Re Kellogg · Chase v. Maine Central Railroad · McDonald v. Inhabitants of Savoy · Jolly v. Terre Haute Drawbridge Co.

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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““The opinion of witnesses is only admissible upon the ground of necessity, but can never be given upon the ultimate facts which it is the duty of the jury to determine.” (Erb v. Popritz, 59 Kan. 264, 270 .)”
    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.