Sannerud v. Brantz’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently December 2022
2 federal appellate · 14 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 Denman v. Hall · North American Uranium, Inc. v. Johnston · Robert W. Anderson House-Wrecking & Excavating, Inc. v. Board of Trustees · Barquin v. Hall Oil Co. · Hollabaugh v. Kolbet
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Damages must be proven with a reasonable degree of certainty, and a court may not resort to speculation or conjecture in determining the proper amount to award.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage““The standard for reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence is well established. On review, this court assumes that the evidence in favor of the successful party is true. We leave out of consideration entirely the evidence presented by the unsuccessful party that conflicts with the evidence of the successful party, and we afford to the evidence of the successful party every favorable inference that may be reasonably and fairly drawn from it.” Kadrmas v. Valley West Homeowner’s As sociation, 848 P.2d 826, 828 (Wyo.1993) (citation omitted).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“a false and malicious statement made in disparagement of a person's title to real or personal property, or of some right of his causing him special damage.”
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.