State v. Duckett’s Empirical Analysis
1925
Citation profile
4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently July 1981
4 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.
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The question of intent is not a necessary element of the offense. If an act be done by which the terms of the statute are violated, the offense is complete, regardless of the intent ... it appears that the defendant had acted under a form of approval recognized and used in the conduct of banks. Yet, when the mandate of the statute is invoked, the statute must govern, and the fact that the defendant followed a proceeding recognized and established, with no intent to defraud, cannot absolve him from the penalties fixed by statute. Approval implies knowledge and, in this case, the exercise of discretion after knowledge. To approve beforehand would be without knowledge and without the exercise of discretion. “No matter how disagreeable it is to pronounce a judgment like this, when the law requires it, it has to be done.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Davies
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.