Parham v. Kohler’s Empirical Analysis
1961
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently January 2008
1 federal appellate · 14 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 Hovey v. Elliott · Palm Shores, Inc. v. Nobles · McCollum v. Birmingham Post Co.
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“However, the law has provided the courts with definite alternatives when, as in the case at bar, they clearly establish that perjured testimony has been given. Among other things, the court may cite the person for contempt, direct that the record be sent to the State Attorney's office for investigation or, in proper cases, strike the pleading or testimony which has clearly been shown to be sham.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[e]ven if the [trial] court had cited the appellants for contempt, they would still have a constitutional right to have their cause heard, and it would be a denial of due process to dismiss with prejudice.”
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.