Ellison v. Gray’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently January 2026
13 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
Relies on Hickman v. Taylor · Upjohn Company v. United States · Pacelli v. United States · United States v. Pfizer Inc. · Handgards, Inc. v. Johnson & Johnson
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“However, before appropriate relief may be granted, it must be shown that the trial court exceeded its authority or discretion in ordering or denying pretrial discovery.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The opinion work product area is carved out to protect the right of counsel to privacy in the analysis and preparation of the client's case.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. MUSONDA v. STATE · MUSONDA v. STATE“[t]he determinative issue presented [wa]s whether the Oklahoma Discovery Code, 12 O.S. 1982 Supp. § 3203(B)(2) precludes discovery of an attorney's ordinary or opinion work product in an action for malicious prosecution if the defense of good faith reliance on advice of counsel is raised.” Id. at 361-62. In finding that the work product at issue was discoverable, the Oklahoma Supreme Court stated that”
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.