Chapin v. Rogers’s Empirical Analysis
1969
Citation profile
28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently March 1994 · most notably Jewell v. Seidenberg (1970), Anderson v. Welsh (1974)
28 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 25 Cal. 2d 486 - Ybarra v. Spangard · Brown v. St. Louis Public Service Company · Hogsett v. Hanna · Pettingell v. Moede · Jackson v. Southwestern Public Service Company
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Whenever Oklahoma Uniform Jury Instructions (OUJI) contain an instruction applicable in a civil case or a criminal case, giving due consideration to the facts and the prevailing law, and the court determines that the jury should be instructed on the subject, the OUJI instructions shall be used unless the court determines that it does not accurately state the law. Whenever OUJI does not contain an instruction on a subject on which the court determines that the jury should be instructed, the instruction given on that subject should be simple, brief, impartial and free from argument. Counsel for either party or parties shall have a right to request instructions by so requesting in writing. . Each instruction shall be accompanied by a copy, and a copy shall be delivered to opposing counsel. In addition to numbering the copies and indicating who tendered them, the copy shall contain a notation substantially as follows: ...””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“... [A] U.J.I. instruction must be used, unless the court finds it to be erroneous or otherwise improper, and states into the record the reasons for not using it. A failure to comply with the Order of the New Mexico Supreme Court in this regard constitutes reversible error.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Martinez v. Schmick
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.