Mingo v. Holleran’s Empirical Analysis
1922
Citation profile
4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently March 1965
4 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. Prall v. District Court · Bank of Willmar v. Lawler · State ex rel. Casmey v. Teal · Farris v. Koplau · State ex rel. Landon v. Anding
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““* * * If that order was valid as within the authority of the court, it must stand, for it cannot be reviewed in this manner; if a valid order, it was appealable and that and not mandamus is the proper remedy. But the order was without authority and ineffective.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ginsberg v. Williams
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.