Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 72 ARKAPP 102 - Kristie's Katering, Inc. v. Ameri

Kristie's Katering, Inc. v. Ameri’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
March 2005
most recently cited

6 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Stein v. Lukas · Edwards v. Stills · Union Pacific Railroad v. Sharp · Trimble v. State · Pineview Farms, Inc. v. A.O. Smith Harvestore, Inc.

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

  1. “Here it is established by the undisputed proof as well as by the trial court's finding of fact that the plaintiffs could not have been prejudiced by [the juror's] participation in the case. [The juror] had no knowledge that a suit had been filed in his behalf by [the appellant's firm] or by anyone else, and it was therefore impossible for the pendency of that case to have any effect whatever upon his deliberations and conclusions as a juror.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “certainly could have been aware they were not answering truthfully.”
    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.