Cowan v. Thompson’s Empirical Analysis
1928
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently February 1957
7 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 Howell v. Lambersom · Arkansas State Highway Commission v. Kerby · Hout v. Harvey · Carson v. Road Improvement District No. 2 · Higginbotham v. Road Improvement District No. 3
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““To repair means, according to the lexicographers, ‘to mend, add to, or make over; to restore to a sound or good state.’ Standard Dictionary. ‘To restore to a sound or good state after decay, injury, dilapidation or partial destruction; to restore or reinstate as in former standing.’ Webster.” [ 154 Ark. 112 , 241 S.W. 868 .]”
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.