Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 85 N.J. 65 - Lynch v. Rubacky

Lynch v. Rubacky’s Empirical Analysis

1981

Citation profile

117
cited by 117 later decisions
4
states following
January 2019
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 20 district · 89 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 117 later decisions — most recently January 2019 · most notably Crispin v. Volkswagenwerk, A.G. (1984), Circle Chevrolet Co. v. Giordano, Halleran & Ciesla (1995)

3 federal appellate · 20 district · 89 state decisions

5401981199020002010decided

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 Lopez v. Swyer · Fernandi v. Strully · Newmark v. Gimbel's Incorporated · Burd v. New Jersey Telephone Company · Germann v. Matriss

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

  1. “... the discovery rule centers upon an injured party's knowledge concerning the origin and existence of his injuries as related to the conduct of another person. [ Lynch v. Rubacky, 85 N.J. 65, 70 (1981)]”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “learns, or reasonably should learn, the existence of that state of facts which may equate in law with a cause of action”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “`through the use of reasonable diligence should have discovered' language in our statute adequately covers and includes the duty of reasonably diligent inquiry which Justice White talked about in Kubrick . " Id. The Supreme Court of New Jersey, in a case arising after the United States Supreme Court's decision in Kubrick , concluded that "a cause of action will not be held to accrue until the injured party discovers... that he may have a basis for an actionable claim ... [or] knows or has reasons to know that he has a right of redress.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.