Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 68 Haw. 472 - Wiegand v. Colbert

Wiegand v. Colbert’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

35
cited by 35 later decisions
1
states following
September 2024
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently September 2024 · most notably Amfac, Inc. v. Waikiki Beachcomber Investment Co. (1992), Schmidt v. Board of Directors of the Ass'n of Apartment Owners (1992)

4 federal appellate · 29 state decisions

16019861990200020102020decided

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 Espaniola v. Cawdrey Mars Joint Venture

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

  1. “In awarding interest in civil cases, the judge is authorized to designate the commencement date to conform with the circumstances of each case, provided that the earliest commencement date in cases arising in tort, may be the date when the injury first occurred and in cases arising by breach of contract, it may be the date when the breach first occurred.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Where the issuance of judgment is greatly delayed for any reason, such fixed commencement date can result in substantial injustice. Allowing the trial judge to designate the commencement date will permit more equitable results.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[T]he purpose of prejudgment interest, in the context of HRS § 636–16, is to correct injustice when a judgment is delayed for a long period of time for any reason, including litigation delays, . . . and to permit more equitable results and to more speedily resolve cases[.]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.