Swift v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
1948
Citation profile
2 district · 63 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 65 later decisions — most recently November 2021 · most notably People v. District Court, Second Judicial District (1986), Ace Flying Service, Inc. v. Colorado Department of Agriculture (1957)
2 district · 63 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 City of Colorado Springs v. Street · Pine Martin Mining Co. v. Empire Zinc Co. · Denver & New Orleans R. R. v. Lamborn · McClain v. People · First National Bank v. Minnesota Mines, Inc.
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 65 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The order for temporary [sic] possession was clearly interlocutory, and a writ of error did not lie to review the same (Burlington & Colorado R.R. Co. v. Colorado Eastern R.R. Co., 45 Colo. 222 , 100 Pac. 607 , Miller v. City and County of Denver, 84 Colo. 397 , 270 Pac. 866 ; First National Bank v. Minnesota Mines, Inc., 109 Colo. 6 , 121 P. (2d) 488 ); consequently, complainants had no plain, speedy or adequate remedy at law, and certiorari lies.” (Emphasis supplied.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[I]t is the duty of a court, or judge, when temporary possession is sought, to determine as near as may be from competent evidence the compensation to which the landowner will probably be entitled when the amount is determined by a board of commissioners or a jury which must ultimately make the ascertainment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[the sum fixed by the court on entering an order for immediate possession should be equal to an amount which ... will reimburse [landowners] for all damages and pay the compensation which is to be allowed to the [landowners] when ascertained by a board of commissioners or jury”
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.