State ex rel. Griffith v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
1923
Citation profile
26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently September 1994 · most notably Craig v. Craig (1936), Porath v. McVey (1994)
26 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 Cunningham v. Neagle · State v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad · Brown v. Clark · Clark v. Allaman · Miller v. Dunn
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In determining the intent of the legislature the court is not limited to a mere consideration of the words employed, but may properly look to the purpose to be accomplished, the necessity and effect of the statute, under the different constructions suggested.” (City of Emporia v. Norton, 16 Kan. 236 .) “In construing a statute the court may look to the history of the times, to the causes which induced its enactment and to the object sought tg be attained.” (State, ex rel., v. Davis, 114 Kan. 270, 287 , 217 Pac. 905 .)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.