Solomon v. Lampl’s Empirical Analysis
1932
Citation profile
20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently September 1993
20 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 State ex rel. Hopkins v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. · Wideman v. Faivre · Pittman & Harrison Co. v. Hayes · Miller v. Thayer · Venable v. Dutch
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In State, ex rel., v. Telephone Co., 115 Kan. 236, 269 , 223 Pac. 771 , Mr. Justice Marshall estimated that this court had decided ‘probably five hundred times’ that where a finding of fact by jury, referee or trial court had the support of competent though disputed testimony this court would not disturb it.” (p. 478.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““This court has nothing to do with the evidence further than to decide whether the trial court’s findings of fact, general or special, are supported by substantial and competent evidence.” (p. 478.)”
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.