Johnson v. Deltadynamics, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

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

1. “test ... is clearly contrary to that goal. Not only would such application directly contradict the Wisconsin Supreme Court's directives and render the statute meaningless as to contract claims, it would conflict with the legislative goal of predictability of result in the area of statutes of limitations. 51 Memorandum and Order of May 25, 1988 at 6. 52 As this court put it in Johnson, 53 [t]he statute would add little or nothing to the common law of Wisconsin if by the use of the expression”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 217 Wis. 2d 294 - Abraham v. General Casualty Co. · 141 Wis. 2d 622 - Guertin v. Harbour Assurance Co. of Bermuda

2. “dispute over a contract, whose location is not easily pinned to a particular state ...”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 217 Wis. 2d 294 - Abraham v. General Casualty Co. · McMahon v. Pennsylvania Life Insurance

3. “"But no action to recover damages for injuries to the person, received without this state, shall be brought in any court in this state when such action is barred by any statute of limitations of actions of the state or country in which such injury was received unless the person so injured shall, at the time of such injury, have been a resident of this state.” (Emphasis added.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 141 Wis. 2d 622 - Guertin v. Harbour Assurance Co. of Bermuda