Person v. Morrow’s Empirical Analysis
108 F.2d 838 · 1940
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently April 1985
2 federal appellate · 6 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 662
Relies on Munsey v. Clough · Holman Drew v. Harry Kendall Thaw · Pierce v. Creecy · Hogan v. O'Neill · New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. United States
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.
““In habeas corpus proceeding involving extradition, doubtful questions respecting validity of indictment were to be left to courts of demanding state. “Ordinarily, the questions open to review in a summary proceeding in habeas corpus to prevent extradition are whether petitioner stands substantially charged with a crime in the state from which he fled, whether petitioner is a fugitive from the justice of such state, and whether warrant of extradition is regular on its face.” (Syl. ¶¶ 2, 6.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Powell v. Turner
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.