Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 674 NW2D 233 - Ingram v. Syverson

Ingram v. Syverson’s Empirical Analysis

2004

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
2
states following
October 2024
most recently cited

1 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently October 2024

1 district · 3 state decisions

20200420102020decided

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 Fabio v. Bellomo · Offerdahl v. University of Minnesota Hospitals & Clinics · Wartnick v. Moss & Barnett · Hiber v. City of St. Paul · Paidar v. Hughes

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

  1. “Where reasonable minds can differ on the issue of causation, the [factfinder] should resolve the issue, and it would be error to grant summary judgment.”
    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.