Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 875 P2D 749 - Hughes v. Bobich

Hughes v. Bobich’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
2
states following
January 2015
most recently cited

18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently January 2015

18 state decisions

70199420002010decided

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 Morrison v. Olson · Koch Refining Co. v. Farmers Union Central Exchange, Inc. · United States v. Kasuboski · Hazen v. Municipality of Anchorage · Bachner v. Pearson

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

  1. “[tjhere must be ‘willful noncompliance’ with court orders, or ‘extreme circumstances,’ or ‘gross violations’ of the Rules. The record must also ‘clearly indicate a reasonable exploration of possible and meaningful alternatives to dismissal.’ ... If meaningful alternative sanctions are available, the trial court must ordinarily impose these lesser sanctions....”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “fails to obey an order to provide or permit discovery ... .”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “A party may serve upon any other party a written request for the admission, for purpose of the pending action only, of the truth of any matters ... that relate to statements or opinions of fact or of the application of law to fact.... Each matter of which an admission is requested shall be separately set forth. The matter is admitted unless, within thirty days after service of the request, or within such shorter or longer time as the court may allow, the party to whom the request is directed serves upon the party requesting the admission a written answer or objection addressed to the matter [.]”
    2 later decisions 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.