Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 788 SW2D 809 - Singleton v. Procon Products

Singleton v. Procon Products’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
April 2018
most recently cited

6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently April 2018

6 state decisions

30199020002010decided

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 P & L Const. Co., Inc. v. Lankford · Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Lane · Maryland Casualty Company v. Young · Harris v. Kroger Co., Inc. · Freemon v. VF Corp.

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

  1. “[A]ny expert medical witness presented must give testimony that preponderates in favor of permanency to qualify as having probative value on that issue. In short, the medical witness, in expressing his opinion, must use language that means that the medical factors that indicate permanency of disability outweigh those to the contrary.”
    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.