Dirickson v. Mings’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently April 2022 · most notably Lockhart v. Loosen (1997), Woolard v. JLG Industries, Inc. (2000)
5 federal appellate · 17 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 Nehring v. Russell · Beesley v. United States · Sloan v. Owen · Agee v. Gant · Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co. of Tulsa, Okl. v. Von Brady
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) The existence of a duty on the part of Defendants to protect Plaintiffs from injury; (2) A violation or breach of that duty; and (3) Injury to Plaintiffs proximately resulting from Defendants’ breach.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“the efficient cause which sets in motion the chain of circumstances leading to the injury.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“'in the natural and continuous sequence, produces [the plaintiff's] injury and without which the injury would not have happened.'”
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.