Whittington v. Whittington’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
1 district · 14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently December 2017
1 district · 14 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 Craft v. Rice · Zurich Insurance Co. v. Mitchell · Gall v. Scroggy · Murphy v. Murphy · Wiener v. Wiener
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Comment h of the Restatement states, It is for the court to determine, on 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.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“While we cannot condone or excuse Mr. Whittington's reprehensible actions, we do not see them as rising to the level of outrageousness necessary for tortious liability.”
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.