City National Bank of Fort Smith v. Unique Structures, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
929 F.2d 1308 · 1991
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently October 2010 · most notably Stewart Title Guaranty Co. v. American Abstract & Title Co. (2005), Porous Media Corp. v. Pall Corp. (1999)
23 federal appellate · 2 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 Dace v. ACF Industries, Inc. · 65 Wash. 2d 157 - Calbom v. Knudtzon · Yeldell v. Tutt · Mason v. Funderburk · Walt Bennett Ford, Inc. v. Pulaski County Special School District
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“appellate courts must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the [non-moving] party ... and disregard all contrary evidence and inferences. If ... there is any evidence of probative value which raises a material fact issue, then the [motion for a directed verdict should not be granted].”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“shocking, monstrous, or constitute[d] a plain injustice.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) the existence of a valid contractual relationship or business expectancy; (2) knowledge of the relationship or expectancy on the part of the interferer; (3) intentional interference inducing or causing a breach or termination of the relationship or expectancy; and (4) resultant damage to the party whose relationship or expectancy has been disrupted.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.