Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 175 Or. 87 - State Ex Rel. Johnson v. Farrell

State Ex Rel. Johnson v. Farrell’s Empirical Analysis

1944

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
2
states following
January 1969
most recently cited

3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently January 1969

3 state decisions

10194419501960decided

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 State v. Olcott · State v. Lord · Watts v. Gerking · Gibson v. Kay · State v. Metschan

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. ““ * * * It purports to be ‘a suit by the state in its sovereign capacity, as the guardian of the rights of the people, instituted by its executive law officers’, State ex rel. v. Metschan, supra, 32 Or. at p. 384 . It has been determined that such a suit to enjoin the secretary of state from certifying an initiative petition can be instituted on the relation of the district attorney for Marion County, the only county in which, under the statute, the suit can be maintained. State ex rel. v. Olcott, 62 Or. 277 , 125 P. 303 . See, also, State ex rel. v. Snell, 155 Or. 300 , 60 P. (2d) 964 . The suit cannot be brought on the relation of a citizen, but only by the state ‘ through its proper law officer’, Friendly v. Olcott, 61 Or. 580, 587 , 123 P. 53 ; State ex rel. v. Metschan, supra, 32 Or. at p. 384 ; State ex rel. v. Lord, supra, 28 Or, at p. 526 . The district attorney, in his own district, is deemed ‘the proper law officer’, because, in the absence of statutory regulations, he ‘possesses the power of the attorney general at common law.’ Watts v. Gerking, supra; Gibson v. Kay, supra, 68 Or. at p. 594; State ex rel. v. Duniway, supra; State v. Guglielmo, 46 Or. 250, 257 , 79 P. 577 , 80 P. 103 , 69 L. R. A. 466, 7 Ann. Cas. 976; State ex rel. v. Lord, supra, 28 Or. at p. 528 .””
    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.