Reed v. Goldneck’s Empirical Analysis
1905
Citation profile
24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently May 2000
24 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 Dunn v. Cass Avenue & Fair Grounds Railway Co. · Carpenter v. Lippitt · Gillum v. Sisson · State ex rel. Lee v. Jenkins · State ex rel. Boulton v. Norvell
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.
““If any person shall discover any dog or dogs in the act of killing, wounding or chasing sheep in any portion of this State, or shall discover any dog or dogs under such circumstances as to satisfactorily show that such dog or dogs has or have been recently engaged in killing or chasing sheep or other domestic animal or animals, such person is authorized to immediately pursue and kill such dog or dogs. Provided, however, that such dog or dogs shall not be killed in any enclosure belonging to or being in lawful possession of the owner of such dog or dogs.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[I]t is apparent from the very terms of the statute that it was not the purpose of the Legislature to make the rule more stringent in favor of the dog and against the person charged with the killing thereof, while in a threatening attitude.... It seems clear, when viewed from this standpoint, that we must construe it to mean that it is in part a further act of outlawry against the dog, and that it not only outlaws a sheep-killing dog, but outlaws as well the dog discovered under suspicious circumstances or under circumstances reasonably suspicious.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Propes v. Griffith“this being the settled law at the time the statute was enacted, we must presume that the legislature knew the law as it existed, and sought to make some change therein by statutory innovation. We are to understand, then, that the legislature intended to change the rule”
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.