Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 669 P2D 857 - Norton v. Blackham

Norton v. Blackham’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
1
states following
February 2020
most recently cited

26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently February 2020 · most notably Ong International (U.S.A.) Inc. v. 11th Avenue Corp. (1993), Smith v. Four Corners Mental Health Center, Inc. (2003)

26 state decisions

8019831990200020102020decided

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 Bowen v. Riverton City · Horgan v. Industrial Design Corp. · 22 Utah 2d 252 - Rainford v. Rytting · Massey v. Utah Power & Light · Taylor v. Gasor, Inc.

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

  1. “the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[AJn affidavit in opposition to a motion for summary judgment must set forth specific facts that would be admissible in evidence in order to show there is a genuine issue for trial”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “the mere existence of issues of fact does not preclude summary judgment. The issues of fact must be material to the applicable rule of law.”
    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.