Rayburne v. Queen’s Empirical Analysis
1958
Citation profile
34 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently June 2002 · most notably Worker's Compensation Claim of Newman v. State Ex Rel. Wyoming Workers' Safety & Compensation Division (2002), BOARD OF TRUSTEES, LARAMIE CTY SCH. D. NO. 1 v. Spiegel (1976)
34 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 Jacoby v. City of Gillette · Howard v. Lindmier · Pellish Bros. v. Cooper · Lake De Smet Reservoir Company v. Kaufmann · State ex rel. Marsh v. State Board of Land Commissioners
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“This court has repeatedly held that * * * where evidence is not in the record, the court assumes requisite facts were established to sustain the judgment, Pettish Bros. v. Cooper, 47 Wyo. 480, 38 P.2d 607 ; that absence of evidence does not warrant presumption that judgment is not sustained by the evidence, Jacobson v. Wickam, 36 Wyo. 522 , 257 P. 7 ; where evidence not brought to reviewing court, facts found must be taken as true, Arp v. Jacobs, 3 Wyo. 489 , 27 P. 800 ; and where part of evidence is omitted the record is no more effectual than no record and the court will assume the judgment is supported, Callahan v. E.O. Houck & Co., 14 Wyo. 201 , 83 P. 372 . See also Lakeview Canal Co. v. R. Hardesty Mfg. Co., 31 Wyo. 182 , 224 P. 853 , and Royal Ins. Co. v. O.L. Walker Lumber Co., 23 Wyo. 264 , 148 P. 340 , 24 Wyo. 59 , 155 P. 1101 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Weller v. Weller“[Thhe trial "de novo" as mentioned in Seetion 91-306, W.R.S.1981, is simply limited to a determination on the part of the District Court whether on the facts proven there was "an illegal exercise" of the Board's discretion, a case of fraud, or a "grave abuse of such discretion[."] Unless one of these three elements should appear the action of the Board should not be disturbed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * a party attempting to secure State land because the former lessee has subleased for a cash consideration in excess of the rental paid to the State has the burden of proving this; and where a lump-sum payment is made by a third party, for both the State and the deeded lands, the burden cannot be met by a mere guess as to the apportionment of amounts. * * * ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bosler v. McKechnie
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.