Seal v. Hart’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently May 2010
12 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 Ginter v. Palmer & Co. · Abrahamsen v. Mountain States Telephone & Telegraph Co. · Sullivan v. Davis · Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of Colorado v. Sharp · Miller v. Kaiser
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the provisions of C.R.C.P. 121 [section 1-15(8)] concerning confession of a motion by not filing a response thereto, are inapplicable to a motion for summary judgment under C.R.CP. 56.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“where the party making the misrepresentation has or professes to have superior knowledge which is not reasonably available to the person to whom the representation is made”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“considering the drastic nature of the remedy of summary judgment,”
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.