Tail v. Olson’s Empirical Analysis
1944
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 49 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently November 2022 · most notably Barrett v. Hunter (1950), State v. Silvers (1998)
2 federal appellate · 49 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 Betts v. Brady · Walker v. Johnston · Quirin Haupt Kerling Burger Heinck Thiel Neubauer United States Quirin v. Cox Usa 6 · Ex Parte Milligan · Simmons v. Georgia Iron & Coal 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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"[The writ of habeas corpus] may be analogized to a proceeding in rem, and is instituted for the sole purpose of having the person restrained of his liberty produced before the judge, in order that the cause of his detention may be inquired into and his status fixed. The person to whom the writ is directed makes response to the writ, not to the petition .... The respondent, in his answer to the writ, seeks simply to justify his conduct and relieve himself from the imputation of having imprisoned without lawful authority a person entitled to his liberty. He comes to no issue with the applicant for the writ. He answers the writ."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[I]f the person so imprisoned or detained is imprisoned or detained without any legal authority, upon making the same appear to such judge, by oath or affirmation, it shall be his duty forthwith to allow a writ of habeas corpus, which writ shall be issued forthwith by the clerk of the district court, or by the county judge, as the case may require, under the seal of the court whereof the person allowing such writ is a judge, directed to the proper officer, person or persons who detains such prisoner.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[t]he test of finality for the purpose of an appeal in a habeas corpus proceeding is not necessarily whether the whole matter involved in the action is concluded, but whether the particular proceeding or action is terminated by the judgment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Anderson v. Houston
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.