Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 173 Mo. 421 - Simpson v. Stoddard County

Simpson v. Stoddard County’s Empirical Analysis

1903

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
3
states following
May 2013
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 30 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently May 2013 · most notably State Upon the Information of Shartel v. Missouri Utilities Co. (1932), State ex rel. Attorney General v. Donald (1915)

2 federal appellate · 30 state decisions

150190319101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Schulenberg v. Harriman · Wright v. Roseberry · Railroad Company v. Baldwin · Missouri Kansas and Texas Railway Company v. Kansas Pacific Railway Company · The Town of East Hartford v. The Hartford Bridge Company

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

  1. ““The whole previous system of the State in regard to these lands was changed, by general law applicable to every county in the State by which a complete title was to be vested in each county by a patent to be issued for the swamp land therein situate, and thenceforth the State delegated to each county the execution of its trust as to the land situate in each county . . . and thereafter the swamp lands in said county were subject to sale and conveyance by the county under the provisions of the general law expressed in those acts.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““The net proceeds'of the sales of all such lands, after defraying the expenses of draining, reclaiming, surveying and selling the same as herein provided, shall be paid into the county treasury and become a part of the public school fund of the county.””
    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.