Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 82 S.D. 537 - Moody County v. Cable

Moody County v. Cable’s Empirical Analysis

1967

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
1
states following
June 1991
most recently cited

25 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently June 1991 · most notably In Re Application of SDDS, Inc. (1991), Application of Veith (1978)

25 state decisions

1101967197019801990decided

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 Doling v. Hyde County · In Re Appeals of Bottcher · Iversen v. Terriere · Hines v. Moulton · Delatour v. Smith

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

  1. “SDC 33.1405 [now SDCL 15-6-52(a)] merely grants an exception to rulings of the court, but does require request for a finding on an issue of fact as foundation for an assignment of insufficiency of the evidence as to it. The court has uniformly so held. [Citations omitted] Plaintiff is therefore limited to the question of whether the findings support the conclusions of law and judgment.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[T]hat where the sufficiency of the evidence was not questioned before the trial court by ... request for findings or other appropriate procedure sufficiency of the evidence cannot be reviewed and appellant is therefore limited to the question of whether the findings support the conclusions of law and judgment.”
    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.