Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 16 P.3d 233 - Davidson v. McClellan

Davidson v. McClellan’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
October 2025
most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently October 2025

14 state decisions

70200120102020decided

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 Sullivan v. United States · Anschuetz & Co. v. Mississippi River Bridge Authority · Victoria Buckley, Secretary of State of Colorado, v. American Constitutional Law Foundation, Inc. · Standard Oil Co of California v. United States · Graham v. Hodges

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

  1. “extreme situations or extraordinary cireumstances”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “It is essential, for practical reasons as well as for fundamental fairness, that there be a point at which litigation reaches a conclusion and that parties be permitted to rely on the outcome.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “That the formal pronouncements of legal tribunals upon causes submitted to them should enjoy every possible degree of finality and conclusiveness would seem to be a necessary predicate to the proper functioning of the courts themselves. To permit their decisions to be evaded or disregarded for insufficient cause or in modes not sanctioned by law would tend to disrupt the administration of justice and bring courts into disrepute. Public policy requires that. . . judgments, as solemn records upon which valuable rights rest, should not lightly be disturbed or overthrown.”
    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.