Mills v. Hausmann-McNally’s Empirical Analysis
2014
Citation profile
Relationships
Relies on Freeman v. Chicago Musical Instrument Co. · In Re Yarn Processing Patent Validity Litigation. Celanese Corporation and Fiber Industries, Inc. v. Leesona Corporation, Lex Tex Ltd., Inc. · Schiessle v. Stephens · Philips Medical Systems International B.V. v. Bruetman · In re Sandahl
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.
“[T]o shift the onus of potential malpractice liability onto PWR, Defendant would have to show that its failure to provide ITCA-compliant notice was done in subjective ignorance of the need for such notice, and in reliance upon a misrepresentation by a state employee. As PWR has demonstrated, Defendant was neither subjectively ignorant nor acting in reliance upon any misleading communications from the state.”
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.