Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 113 SW2D 944 - Stephens v. Mills County

Stephens v. Mills County’s Empirical Analysis

1938

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
March 1992
most recently cited

3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently March 1992

3 state decisions

101938194019501960197019801990decided

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. Price · Greer v. Hunt County · Hill County v. Sauls · 14 Tex. Civ. App. 234 - Bonner v. Bradley · Wood County v. Leath

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

  1. ““The law is settled that an implied contract arises only where in the circumstances disclosed which, according to the ordinary course of dealing and the common understanding of men, show a mutual intent to contract. 10 Tex.jur. 18, 23.””
    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.