State v. Rust’s Empirical Analysis
1922
Citation profile
2 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently December 1980
2 district · 8 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 In Re Rust · People v. Gordon · State v. Bonham
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““On all cards, signs, letter-heads, envelopes and bill-heads used by those licensed by this act to practice osteopathy or osteopathy and surgery the word ‘osteopathic’ shall always immediately precede the word ‘physician’ and if the word ‘surgeon’ is used in connection with said name, the word ‘osteopathic’ shall also immediately precede said word ‘surgeon.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The act of 1919 regulating the practice of osteopathy does not define the method or science except by reference. That reference is answered, however, we think, by the case of State v. Bonham, supra, and the more recent case of In re Rust, 181 Cal. 73 , 183 Pac. 548 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““The authority given by this form of license covers a field that is all inclusive, while that of each of the other kinds of practitioners is limited in its scope.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Lydon
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.