Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 94 Idaho 794 - Hamby v. J. R. Simplot Co.

Hamby v. J. R. Simplot Co.’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
2
states following
December 1996
most recently cited

22 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently December 1996

22 state decisions

110197219801990decided

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 In re the Estate of Jessup · Sharon v. Sharon, 11991 (Cal. 7-17-1889) · In Re Estate of Baldwin · Harron v. Harron · Gem-Valley Ranches, Inc. v. Small

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

  1. “I.C. § 32-301. How solemnized. — Marriage must be solemnized, authenticated and recorded as provided in this chapter, but noncompliance with its provisions does not invalidate any lawful marriage. I.C. § 32-201. What constitutes marriage. — Marriage is a personal relation-arising out of a civil contract, to which the consent of parties capable of making it is necessary. Consent alone will not constitute marriage; it must be followed by a solemnization, or by a mutual assumption of marital rights, duties or obligations. I.C. § 32-203. Proof of consent and consummation. — Consent to and subsequent consummation of marriage may be manifested in any form, and may be proved under the same general rules of evidence as facts in other cases.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““. . . is the arbiter of conflicting evidence, and if the Board’s [Commission’s] determination is supported by substantial, competent evidence, it will not be disturbed on appeal.” Hamby v. Simplot Company, 94 Idaho 794, 797 , 498 P.2d 1267, 1270 (1972); I.C. § 72-732; Idaho Const. art. V, § 9.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““Evidence introduced without objection stands as evidence in the case for all purposes and if sufficiently probative may support a finding.” Hamby v. Simplot Company, 94 Idaho 794, 796 , 498 P. 2d 1267, 1269 (1972).”
    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.