Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 107 N.C. 967 - State v. . Lewis

State v. . Lewis’s Empirical Analysis

1890

Citation profile

24
cited by 24 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
10
states following
June 2008
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 24 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2008

1 federal appellate · 21 state decisions — followed in 10 states

60189019001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 State v. Carroll · Petersilea v. Stone · State ex rel. Knowlton v. Williams · The People of N.C. Ex Rel . Norfleet v. . Staton, Jr. · Diggs v. State

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

  1. ““An officer de. facto is one whose acts, though not those of a lawful officer, the law, upon principles of policy and justice, will hold valid so far as they involve the interests of the publie and third persons, where the duties of the office were exercised— First, without a known appointment or elec tion, but under such circumstances of reputation or acquiescence as were calculated to induce people, without inquiry, to submit to or invoke his action, supposing him to be the officer he assumed to be; second, under color of a known and valid appointment or election, but where the officer failed to conform to some precedent requirement or condition, as to take an oath, give a bond, or the like; third, under color of a known election or appointment, void because there was a want of power in the electing or appointing body, or by reason of some defect or irregularity in its exercise, such ineligibility, want of power, or defect being unknown to the public; fourth, under color of an election or appointment by or pursuant to a public unconstitutional law before the same is adjudged to be such.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The Governor is not bound to assign any reason in the commission or to this Court. As to all the world, except the Legislature, he is the final judge of the fitness of his reasons.”
    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.