Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 89 S.D. 114 - Brasel v. Myers

Brasel v. Myers’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
April 1999
most recently cited

14 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Wilson v. Great Northern Railway Company · Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. Henry Carlson Co. · Rikansrud v. City of Canton · Smith v. City of Yankton · Brasel v. City of Pierre

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

  1. “(1) The evidence must be viewed most favorably to the nonmoving party; (2) The burden of proof is upon the mov-ant to show clearly there is no genuine issue of material fact and that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law: (3) It was never intended to be used as a substitute for a trial by jury where any genuine issue of material fact exists; (4) A surmise that a party will not prevail upon trial is not sufficient basis to grant the motion on issues which are not shown to be sham, frivolous or so insubstantial that it is obvious that it would be futile to try them; (5) Summary judgment is an extreme remedy and should be awarded only when the truth is clear, and reasonable doubts touching the existence of a genuine issue as to material fact should be resolved against the mov-ant; (6) Where, however, no genuine issue of fact exists, it is looked upon with favor and is particularly adapted to expose sham claims and defenses.”
    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.