Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 131 MOAPP 470 - State ex rel. White v. Small

State ex rel. White v. Small’s Empirical Analysis

1908

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
4
states following
September 1976
most recently cited

17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently September 1976

17 state decisions

7019081910192019301940195019601970decided

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 State ex rel. Brown v. Town of Westport · State v. Fleming · State ex inf. Crow v. Fleming · The People v. . Carpenter · State ex rel. Patterson v. McReynolds

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

  1. ““But it is said the order cannot be annulled in the present proceeding because the village of Anniston has not been made a defendant, and, as the corporate life of the town is attacked, it was a necessary party. Support is lent to this position by the opinion in State ex rel. v. Huff, 105 Mo. App. 354 , 79 S. W. 1010 ; but the point was not essential to the decision of said cause, and the ruling ought to be disapproved, for it is opposed not only to the current of authority, but to decisions of our Supreme Court. The doctrine is accepted that when in a quo zvarranto proceeding, or one in the nature of quo zvarranto, the existence of a municipality is denied, the proper respondents are the usurping officials who wield municipal powers, and to make the town a party is illogical, because thereby its existence would be implied, which is the very fact denied. This proposition was decided in State ex rel. v. Coffee, 59 Mo. 59, 67 ; State ex rel. v. McReynolds, 61 Mo. 203, 212 ; State ex inf. v. Fleming, 147 Mo. 1, 9 ( 44 S. W. 758 ) ; Id., 158 Mo. 558, 567 ( 59 S. W. 118 ) ; State ex inf. v. McClain, 187 Mo. 409, 412 , 86 S. W. 135 ; State ex rel. v. Gravel Road Co., 116 Mo. App. 175, 193 , 92 S. W. 153 ; 17 Enc. Pl. & Pr. 437.””
    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.