Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 104 Colo. 62 - Mitchell v. Jones

Mitchell v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis

1939

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
2
states following
May 2009
most recently cited

2 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently May 2009

2 district · 5 state decisions

4019391940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Ramon Valdes v. Tulio Larrinaga · Russell v. Courier Printing & Publishing Co. · Oliver v. Wilder

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

  1. “Before a court should determine a contract which has been made in good faith stipulating for nothing that is malum in se, nothing that is made malum prohibitum, to be void as contravening the policy of the state, it should be satisfied that the advantage to accrue to the public for so holding is certain and substantial, not theoretical or problematic.”
    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.