Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 981 P.2d 172 - Mitchell v. Wilmore

Mitchell v. Wilmore’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
4
states following
February 2013
most recently cited

1 district · 9 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Hickman v. Taylor · Margolis v. District Court in & for the County of Arapahoe · 170 N.J. Super. 64 - Conforti & Eisele, Inc. v. DIV. BLDG. & CONSTR. · Paul v. Rawlings Sporting Goods Co. · 833 F. Supp. 1498 - English Feedlot, Inc. v. Norden Laboratories, Inc.

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

  1. “significant disadvantage in litigating the merits of the controversy”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Leaffer v. Zarlengo · People v. Argomaniz-Ramirez
  2. “conventional appellate remedies would prove inadequate.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Leaffer v. Zarlengo
  3. “mental impressions and thought processes of counsel”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Liebnow ex rel. Liebnow v. Boston Enterprises Inc.

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.