State v. Stayer’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently October 2000
7 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 11 U.S.C. § 523
Relies on Tinker v. Colwell · Huntington v. City of New York · Aetna Life & Casualty Co. v. Purk (In Re Purk)
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In the case before us, there is ample record evidence, from which the trial court could have found that restitution was proper. Notwithstanding the mandate of the statute that the trial court's reasons be included as part of its order, we believe that the failure to do so in this case was harmless error. Nonetheless, we draw attention to this requirement for future guidance of the sentencing courts.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Weeks“a person who the court has determined has suffered pecuniary damages as a result of the defendant's criminal activities”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Gardiner“an individual, public or private corporation, a government, a partnership, or an unincorporated association”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Gardiner
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.