Daniel v. Esmaili’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
16 state decisions
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Texas 296th Judicial District Court)
Relationships
Relies on Mays v. Pierce · Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Marshall · Olivares v. Porter Poultry & Egg Co. · Mid-Continent Casualty Co. v. Whatley · Tatum v. Liner
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the unexplained absence of a statement of facts; (2) the unexplained failure to file a motion for new trial when it is required to successfully assert factual insufficiency on appeal; (3) a poorly written brief raising no arguable points of error; and (4) the appellant’s unexplained failure to appear for oral argument.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[i]neptitude in the presentation of an appeal is not an adequate ground for assessment of a frivolous appeal penalty.”
2 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.