Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 721 P2D 1059 - Leithead v. American Colloid Co.

Leithead v. American Colloid Co.’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

113
cited by 113 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
July 2023
most recently cited

25 federal appellate · 16 district · 58 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 113 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2023 · most notably Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company v. Buell (1987), Twyman v. Twyman (1993)

25 federal appellate · 16 district · 58 state decisions

65019861990200020102020decided

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 Agis v. Howard Johnson Co. · 116 Cal. App. 3d 311 - Pugh v. See's Candies, Inc. · Harris v. Jones · Hubbard v. United Press International, Inc. · 169 W. Va. 673 - Harless v. First National Bank in Fairmont

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

  1. “Court and jury. It is for the court to determine, in the first instance, whether the defendant's conduct may reasonably be regarded as so extreme and outrageous as to permit recovery, or whether it is necessarily so. Where reasonable men may differ, it is for the jury, subject to the control of the court, to determine whether, in the particular case, the conduct has been sufficiently extreme and outrageous to result in liability.”
    10 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “so severe that no reasonable man could be expected to endure it.”
    10 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “It is for the court to determine whether on the evidence severe emotional distress can be found; it is for the jury to determine whether, on the evidence, it has in fact existed.”
    6 later decisions 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.