Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 894 P.2d 1116 - Crussel v. Kirk

Crussel v. Kirk’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
1
states following
November 2015
most recently cited

22 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently November 2015 · most notably Shamblin v. Beasley (1999), Towne v. Hubbard (2000)

22 state decisions

100199520002010decided

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 Universal Athletic Sales Co. v. American Gym, Recreational & Athletic Equipment Corp. · Whiteley v. OKC Corp. · Thompson v. Presbyterian Hospital, Inc. · Culebras Enterprises Corp. v. Rivera-Rios · United States v. Morris

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

  1. “Inherent in the [Oklahoma Constitution] Article II, § 7, standards of due process of law is the element of an opportunity to be heard.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “A party's opportunity to present its case is an essential element of due process.”
    3 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.