Hurst v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1911
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently March 1974
9 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.
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is not necessary for the party to prove, either that he himself heard, or that the party who informed him heard, the other party make the threats. The only thing necessary is that the party indicted was informed, and so believed, that he had been threatened, and That he had good and sufficient reason to apprehend a serious attack from the party making the threats, and that he did so apprehend.' . . . The proof of the threat is made out by showing that the party on trial, and who is charged with carrying a deadly weapon, -was informed, and sincerely and honestly believed, that the threat had been made. Mere idle rumors are not sufficient; but, when the information is brought home to the party charged that he has been threatened, this as to him is proof of the threats.””
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.