Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 114 MICH 640 - Porter v. Edwards

Porter v. Edwards’s Empirical Analysis

1897

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
April 1930
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently April 1930

1 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

2018971900191019201930decided

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 Attorney General ex rel. Crane v. Amos · People v. Hobson

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

  1. ““The rule is well settled that a new statute covering the same ground as the former act supersedes it for all further cases, without the necessity of repealing words. People v. Hobson, 48 Mich. 27 [ 11 N. W. 771 ]. A statute is repealed by a later one in so far as its provisions are inconsistent with it, or are cov ered by it. Attorney General v. Amos, 60 Mich. 372 [ 27 N. W. 571 ].””
    2 later decisions 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.