Osterberg v. Peca’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 state decisions

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

1. “The Osterbergs never argued prior to, or during, trial that substantial compliance satisfies the filing requirements of Section 254.124. The jury was instructed that the statute requires filings on the 30th and 8th day 'prior to the election without mention of substantial compliance. The question submitted to the jury inquired whether Robert Osterberg “failed to file a report of expenditures by an individual not later than the 8th day before election day .... ” [Emphasis added]. The Osterbergs did not object to the instruction or to the question on “substantial compliance” grounds. They neither requested an instruction to the jury on substantial compliance, nor submitted a jury question seeking a finding that their May 4 filing substantially complied with the statutory requirement.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Osterberg v. Peca

2. “The evidence is undisputed that Robert Osterberg failed to file a report “not later than the 8th day before election day” as the jury charge inquired. Accordingly, we find the evidence sufficient, both legally and factually, to support the jury’s finding.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Osterberg v. Peca