Gambrell v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

26 state decisions

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

1. ““The statute (G. S. 1935, 20-1205) provides for review of contempt proceedings on appeal. In part it reads: “ ‘That the testimony taken on the trial of any accusation of contempt shall be preserved, and any judgment or conviction therefor may be reviewed.’ ‘In this case the testimony was not preserved, hence the opportunity to have it reviewed on appeal was frustrated. Cases have reached this court, both on appeal and by habeas corpus. Beoause of the inadequacy of the record in this case the accused was justified in proceeding by habeas corpus. It has been held that habeas corpus by one committed for contempt raises jurisdictional questions only. Contempt is a proceeding somewhat arbitrary at the best, and the absence of essential proceedings in the record constitutes a showing of the lack of jurisdiction.” (p. 623.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. McPherson

2. ““The order of the court on the contempt proceedings contains no statement of the conduct constituting the contempt, neither does it contain a statement of whatever defense or extenuation the accused offered thereto. These matters are jurisdictional and the absence of them renders the order void. (See Wallace v. Weber, 134 Kan. 201 , 5 P.2d 855 , and cases cited therein.)” (Emphasis added.) 160 Kan. at 623 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 19 Kan. App. 2d 528 - State v. Flanagan