Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 150 SW2D 107 - Stone v. Kuteman

Stone v. Kuteman’s Empirical Analysis

1941

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
2
states following
December 1984
most recently cited

11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently December 1984

11 state decisions

4019411950196019701980decided

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 Griggs v. Brewster · Milam County Oil Mill Co. v. Bass · Gregory v. Ward · Knight v. Haley · Heath v. Layne

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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““This writ issues from a superior Court, and is directed to the judge and parties in any suit in an inferior tribunal, commanding them to cease from the prosecution thereof, upon a suggestion that either the cause originally or some collateral matter arising therein does not belong to that jurisdiction, but to the cognizance of some other Court. (Black, Vol. 3, pp. 112, 113.) This, in substance, is the de'fini 'tion of the writ. Its purpose is to restrain the encroachment of the juris•diction of inferior courts, and it is ■extended to a great variety of cases, having a more or less intimate relation with its general object.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““It has also been said that in ‘the absence of a statute expressly permitting it, the general rule is that prohibition, being an extraordinary writ, cannot be resorted to when ordinary and usual remedies provided by law are adequate and available. Accordingly if a complete remedy lies by appeal, writ of error, writ of review, certiorari, injunction, mandamus, motion for change of venue, or in any other manner, the writ should be denied.’ 22 R.C.L. 9, para. 8.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““Prohibition, at common law, was a remedy against encroachment of jurisdiction. Its office was to restrain subordinate courts and inferior judicial tribunals from extending their jurisdiction. In adopting the remedy the courts have almost universally preserved its original common law nature, object and function.” See 73 C.J.S., Prohibition, § 2.”
    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.