Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 121 Tex. 327 - Easterline v. Bean

Easterline v. Bean’s Empirical Analysis

1932

Citation profile

87
cited by 87 later decisions
4
states following
November 2018
most recently cited

85 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 87 later decisions — most recently November 2018 · most notably State Board of Insurance v. Betts (1958), Starnes v. Holloway (1989)

85 state decisions

180193219401950196019701980199020002010decided

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.

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

  1. “A voidable judgment is one rendered by a court having jurisdiction, but which is irregularly and erroneously rendered. • Such a judgment is valid until vacated by direct proceeding instituted for that purpose or until reversed on appeal or by writ of error; it becomes valid by failure within the proper time to have it annulled or by subsequent ratification or confirmation.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “entirely null within itself and which is not susceptible of ratification[,] confirmation,”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The court in that case, in effect, held that the question of the validity of judicial proceedings for want of jurisdiction may arise in: (1) Cases over which a court under the very law of its creation has not possible power, i. e., administration upon the estate of a living person, etc. In such case the law raises no presumption in their support. (2) Cases over which the law has conferred upon the court general judicial power, but its right to exercise it in a particular case is challenged upon the ground that no such state of facts existed or that no such preliminary steps have been taken as would authorize the court to exercise its powers in the given case.”
    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.