Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 105 U.S. 728 - County of Ralls v. Douglass

County of Ralls v. Douglass’s Empirical Analysis

105 U.S. 728 · 1881

Citation profile

45
cited by 45 later decisions
7
cited 7 times by the Supreme Court
6
states following
June 1956
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 4 district · 8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 45 later decisions (7 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1956 · most notably Norton v. Shelby County (1886), Louis Loeb v. Trustees of Columbia Township (1900)

10 federal appellate · 4 district · 8 state decisions

12018811890190019101920193019401950decided

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 Douglass v. County of Pike · County of Macon v. Shores · State ex rel. Missouri & Mississippi Railroad v. Macon County Court · County of Callaway v. Foster

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

  1. ““ Such being the condition of the law on this subject do-wn to. April, 1878, we do not feel inclined, to reconsider our former rulings, and follow the later decisions of the Supreme Court of, the State in State v. Garroutte, 67 Mo. 445 , and State v. Dallas County, 72 Mo. 329 , where this whole line of cases was substantially overruled. The bonds involved in this suit were all in the hands of innocent holders -when the law of the State was so, materially altered by its courts. In our opinion the rights of the parties to this suit are to be determined by the c law as .it was judicially construed to be when the bonds in question were put on the market as commercial paper.’ Douglass v. Pike County, 101 U. S. 677 , 687.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “as a limitation on future legislation only, and did not operate to repeal enabling acts in existence when the constitution took effect.”
    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.