Corey v. Kocer’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
3 district · 38 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently June 2008 · most notably Lytle v. Morgan (1978), Sabag v. Continental South Dakota (1985)
3 district · 38 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 Waggoner v. Midwestern Development, Inc. · Nugent v. Quam · Federal Land Bank of Omaha v. Houck · Block v. McVay · Friese v. Gulbrandson
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]ithout weighing the evidence [this Court] must decide if there is evidence which would have supported or did support a verdict.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“It is now a relative and variable term which defies precise definition and prohibits an arbitrary mathematical ratio limitation. Broadly speaking, our comparative negligence act now applies whenever a plaintiffs contributory negligence is determined to be small in comparison with defendant’s negligence. What constitutes “slight” or “small” contributory negligence naturally varies with the facts and circumstances in each case. The same conduct constituting slight or small contributory negligence in one case may be great in others when compared with the negligent acts of different defendants under different facts and circumstances.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““In all actions brought to recover damages for injuries to a person or to his property caused by the negligence of another, the fact that the plaintiff may have been guilty of contributory negligence shall not bar a recovery when the contributory negligence of the plaintiff was slight in comparison with the negligence of the defendant, but in such case, the damages shall be reduced in proportion to the amount of plaintiff’s contributory negligence.” (emphasis supplied)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Engel v. Stock
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.