Kyle v. Marcom’s Empirical Analysis
1944
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently December 1976
3 federal appellate · 9 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 1 Smith & H. 513 - Cory v. Olmstead · State Ex Rel. Bailey v. Mabry
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Under the circumstances, we agree with the Chancellor that the naming of these defendants to an ad interim appointment on the new Commission is objectionable and we think the Act invalid to that extent. However, if it is possible to elide this objectionable section of the Act, which contains in Section 10 an all-inclusive ‘rescue or saving clause,’ it is our duty in giving full effect to the authority 'of the Legislature, to make the elision and not invalidate the entire Act. Gates v. Long, [ 172 Tenn. 471 , 113 S. W. 2d 388 ], supra. This is our duty, if such elision may he made without affecting the plain purpose of the legislature and if the elision does not render that part of the Act which is left, unintelligible and incomplete. Such was the course pursued by this court in invalidating an objectionable ad interim appointment in the case of Cheatham County v. Murff, 176 Tenn. 93, 105 , 138 S. W. 2d 430 .” Kyle et al. v. Marcom, 181 Tenn. 57, 70-71 , 178 S. W. 2d 618, 623 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hicks v. Rhea County
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.