Cone v. Garner’s Empirical Analysis
1927
Citation profile
13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently December 2009
13 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 Nixon v. Allen · Ark-Ash Lumber Co. v. Pride & Fairley · Hickey v. State · Huff v. Udey · Jenkins v. Hallstrom
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““But our Constitution does not provide, like many Constitutions, that each bill shall have a title in which shall be expressly stated the purpose of the bill, or any words to that effect. “ In a very recent case this court said: ‘ It is obvious that the title is not as broad as the act, but there is no provision in our Constitution to the effect that the caption of an act must indicate all the subject-matter embraced in the act itself.’ Huff v. Udey, 173 Ark. 464 , 292 S. W. 693 .””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Matthews v. Byrd
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.