Burrell v. Burrell’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently January 2020 · most notably Sengupta v. University of Alaska (2001), Far North Sanitation, Inc. v. Alaska Public Utilities Commission (1992)
37 state decisions
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
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1994
Relies on United States v. Swift & Co. · United States v. Davis · Aguchak v. Montgomery Ward Co., Inc. · Inc v. Airco Inc · O'Link v. O'Link
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“On motion and upon such terms as are just, the court may relieve a party ... from a final judgment, order or proceeding for the following reasons: ... (3) fraud ... misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party; (4) the judgment is void.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Civil Rule 60 is not a substitute for a party failing to file a timely appeal; nor does it allow relitigation of issues that have been resolved by the judgment.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence which by due diligence could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59(d); (3) fraud (whether heretofore denominated intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party; (4) the judgment is void; (5) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged, or a prior judgment upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer equitable that the judgment should have prospective application; or (6) any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment. [[Image here]]”
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.