134 Tex. Crim. 500 - Walker v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1938
Citation profile
6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently July 1970
6 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 English & Scottish-American Mortgage & Investment Co. v. Hardy · Hamilton v. St. Louis, San Francisco & Texas Railway Co. · 32 Tex. Crim. 391 - Nichols v. State
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We conclude that the provisions in the amended Act relating to solicitation and publication of certain statements or advertisements is new substantive matter which has been added in the amended statute and which is not sufficiently germane or pertinent to that contained in the original Act to abrogate the necessity of specifying the addition in the caption of the amendatory legislation. It is our view, therefore, that the portion of Article 4565g, Texas Civ. Stat. (Vernon, 1948), as amended, which relates to the solicitation of patients and to the publication of certain statements or advertisements concerning ophthalmic lenses, frames, eye-glasses, spectacles or parts thereof, is void. Since we have answered your second question in the affirmative, it is unnecessary to consider the first question which you submitted.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Shannon v. Rogers““When the title of the original act is sufficient to embrace the matters covered by the provision of the amendatory act, the title of the latter act is not required to state the subject of the law amended or to specify the nature of the proposed amendment.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Bryant v. State
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.