State v. Butler’s Empirical Analysis
1903
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 2 district · 51 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 63 later decisions — most recently August 1999 · most notably United States v. Philip Berrigan, in No. 72-1938, and Elizabeth McAlister Appeal of Elizabeth McAlister In (1973), Sugarman v. State (1937)
5 federal appellate · 2 district · 51 state decisions — followed in 14 states
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 People v. Markham · Glover v. State · Eichenlaub v. City of St. Joseph · Ex parte Snyder · State v. Layton
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 63 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ The contention of the appellant was that the contract, as reduced to writing, was not binding upon the school township. The court, upon that proposition, very correctly said: “ ‘It is not material whether the contract entered into could have been enforced against the township or not. If it was already executed, and the amount paid out of the township funds, of course, it could not be material whether or not the contract was in writing. Nor could it be material in any event. The question is not whether appellant entered into a contract binding upon the township, but whether he accepted the bribe.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. People v. McGarry““It is an essential element of the offense charged that there must be a valid law in existence at the time of the offer to bribe, authorizing and requiring the officer to act. Without this, his action is not subject to influence, and there can be no bribery, within the terms of the statute.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. People v. McGarry
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.