Staser v. Hogan’s Empirical Analysis
1889
Citation profile
80 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 81 later decisions — most recently December 1994 · most notably Gamble v. Lewis (1949), McDonald v. McDonald (1895)
80 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 Bayless v. Glenn · Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. Thompson · Coleman v. State · Henning v. State · Ohio & Mississippi Railway Co. v. Selby
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 81 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is contended by the appellants that the authority of the Hon. R. D. Richardson to act in the case ceased with the term at which it was tried, and that his action in overruling the motion for a new trial and rendering judgment on the verdict was without authority and void. “On the other hand, it is contended by the appellees that the said Richardson having once acquired jurisdiction to hear and dispose of the case, retained such jurisdiction until the cause was finally disposed of. “It must be manifest to every one that the regular judge could not intelligently hear and dispose of the motion for a new trial in this cause. . . . “We think that where parties voluntarily consent to try their cause before a special judge (judge pro tempore) they should be held as consenting to his making a final disposition of the same; for in the very nature of things no one else can intelligently dispose of it. We think that in such a case the provisions of section 415, R. S. 1881, * **§should be held to apply, without regard to the reason for appointment.” (Our italics.)”
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.