State v. Kuilman’s Empirical Analysis
1941
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently December 2025
11 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
Relies on Alderson v. Marshall · Bean v. Missoula Lumber Co. · Hunt v. Van · McCarthy v. Anaconda Copper Mining Co. · Downs v. Cassidy
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(1) The defendant or the state may move for a continuance. If the motion is made more than 30 days after arraignment or at any time after trial has begun, the court may require that it be supported by affidavit. “(2) The court may upon the motion of either party or upon the court’s own motion order a continuance if the interests of justice so require. “(3) All motions for continuance are addressed to the discretion of the trial court and shall be considered in the light of the diligence shown on the part of the movant. This section shall be construed to the end that criminal cases are tried with due diligence consonant with the rights of the defendant and the state to a speedy trial.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Klemann
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.