Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 105 Wis. 2d 690 - State v. Davis

105 Wis. 2d 690 - State v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis

1981

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
January 2010
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently January 2010

8 state decisions

401981199020002010decided

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 Quick Service Box Co. v. St. Paul Mercury Indemnity Co. · State v. Christopherson · 85 Wis. 2d 558 - Little v. State · New York Life Ins. v. Seifris · 53 Misc. 2d 510 - People v. Fusaro

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

  1. “(1) Whoever with intent to defraud falsely makes or alters a writing or object of any of the following kinds so that it purports to have been made by another, or at another time, or with different provisions, or by authority of one who did not give such authority, is guilty of a Class C felony: (a) A writing or object whereby legal rights or obligations are created, terminated or transferred, or any writing commonly relied upon in business or commercial transactions as evidence of debt or property rights;.... (2) Whoever utters as genuine or possesses with intent to utter as false or as genuine any forged writing or object mentioned in sub. (1), knowing it to have been thus falsely made or altered, is guilty of a Class C felony.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Evidence that the advantage which the instrument, if genuine, would have given has been obtained . . . sufficiently shows an intent to defraud.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “commonly relied upon in business or commercial transactions as evidence of a debt or property right.”
    1 later decision 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.