Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 173 Okla. 108 - Johnson v. Hood

Johnson v. Hood’s Empirical Analysis

1935

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
April 1977
most recently cited

3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently April 1977

3 state decisions

1019351940195019601970decided

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 Pettis v. Johnston · Seal v. Banes · Caulk v. Lowe

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

  1. ““From an examination of the entire record, we are of the opinion that both contentions of the plaintiffs are clearly established, but that it is not necessary for us to pass upon the question of fraud, as the probate proceedings pertaining to the alleged sale of the real estate belonging to said estate are void on their face for want of jurisdiction of the co.unty coiirt of Tulsa county to issue the order of sale.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Syllabus by the Court A general finding or recital in a judgment or order of a court of record, of due service of process, or notice, is limited by and restricted to the process or notice, if any there be, actually found in the record; and the validity of the judgment or order will depend on the sufficiency of such process or notice and service thereof.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““The record clearly establishes that the names and addresses of the heirs and guardians of minors were at all times known to the administrator. “Failure in the instant case to give notice in accordance with the order of the county court to the heirs residing in Chicago when known to the administrator was fatal, * * (Emphasis added.)”
    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.