Hayes v. Eateries, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 41 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently February 2023 · most notably Richmond v. Oneok, Inc. (1997), Fanning v. Brown (2004)
14 federal appellate · 41 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 United Families of America v. Kendrick · Andrijevic v. Kelleran · Sheets v. Teddy's Frosted Foods, Inc. · Peretz v. United States · 162 W. Va. 116 - Harless v. First National Bank in Fairmont
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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Rleview of a trial court's dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted involves a de novo consideration ... as to whether the petition is legally sufficient.... When reviewing a motion to dismiss, the court must take as true all of the challenged pleading's allegations together with all reasonable inferences which may be drawn from them. 'A pleading must not be dismissed for failure to state a legally cognizable claim unless the allegations indicate beyond any doubt that the litigant can prove no set of facts which would entitle him to relief"... Motions to dismiss are generally viewed with disfavor under this liberal standard and to withstand a motion to dismiss it is not necessary for a plaintiff to either identify a specific theory of recovery or set out the correct remedy or relief to which he/ she may be entitled. Generally, a petition may be dismissed as a matter of law for two reasons: (1) lack of any cognizable legal theory, or (2) insufficient facts under a cognizable legal theory.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“in a narrow class of cases in which the discharge is contrary to a clear mandate of public policy as articulated by constitutional, statutory or decisional law.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“[i]f the alleged promises are nothing more than vague assurances, . . . , the issue can be decided as a matter of law.”
4 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.