Walker v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1937
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently June 2007
11 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.
Relationships
Relies on United States v. State of North Carolina · McMurray v. McMurray · Overton v. Blum · State v. Elliott · Jobe v. Urquhart
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.
““It is a very well-established rule that a State is not liable for interest in the absence of a statute or express contract providing for the payment thereof. 59 C.J. 297, par. 455; Auditorial Board v. Arles, 15 Tex. 72, 75 ; U. S. v. State of North Carolina, 136 U.S. 211 , 10 S.Ct. 920 , 34 L.Ed. 336 ; Jobe v. Urquhart, 102 Ark. 470 , 143 S. W. 121 , Ann.Cas.1914A, 351; Peterson v. State, 114 Neb. 612 , 209 N.W. 221 . The act authorizing the bringing of this suit makes no provision for the recovering of interest. We know of no statute that grants general authority to recover interest from the State. The plaintiff is therefore limited in his recovery to the principal sum actually paid by him to the State in settlement of the judgments in question.””
2 later decisions 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.