Azar v. Olson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 state decisions

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

1. “‘T. Under Section 32-1713, NDRC 1943, which provides that ‘A defendant in an action to determine adverse claims * * * upon good cause shown, and on such terms as may be just, may be allowed to defend after trial and within one year after the rendition of judgment therein, but not otherwise.’ It is incumbent upon a defendant who seeks to have a default judgment vacated and to be permitted to defend to show prima facie, by his moving papers, that he has a good and meritorious defense; and where he presents affidavit of merits and proposed answer, and such proposed answer sets forth facts constituting a defense on the merits, and the application to vacate was made within one year after rendition of the default judgment, it was not error for the trial court to grant said application. “2. For reasons stated in the opinion it is held the affidavits of merits, and the proposed answers presented by the defendants in the instant case set forth facts sufficient to constitute a defense on the merits to plaintiff’s complaint.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Sioux Falls Construction Co. v. Dakota Flooring · Hagen v. Altman

2. ““1. Section 28-0627, 28-2901 and 32-1713, NDRC 1943 (Section 28-2901 has been superseded by Rule 60(b), N.D.R. Civ.P. which is applicable in this case), providing for relief from default judgments, are remedial in nature and are entitled to a liberal construction and application. “2. This court views with favor the trial of cases upon their merits. “3. Where, in an action to quiet title, relief is sought within a year after the rendition of a default judgment obtained on constructive service concerning which the defendant had no knowledge and it appears from the showing made that the defendant has a defense on the merits and has shown reasonable diligence in seeking relief, the judgment should he vacated and the defendant permitted to answer.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Sioux Falls Construction Co. v. Dakota Flooring

3. ““It is true that, in applications for relief from a default judgment, the plaintiff will not be permitted to combat any defense claimed by the defendant and that the defense set forth in the answer or the affidavit of merits will, for the purpose of the case, be deemed true. The court will, however, examine the defense pleaded to see whether the same on its face constitutes a defense. Minnesota Thresher Manufacturing Co. v. Holz, 10 N.D. 16 , 84 N.W. 581 ; Johannes v. Coghlan, 23 N.D. 588 , 137 N.W. 822 .””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hagen v. Altman