Sultan v. Mathew’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
32 state decisions
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston))
Relationships
Relies on Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp. · Continental Coffee Products Co. v. Cazarez · Dubai Petroleum Co. v. Kazi · Lone Star Gas Co. v. State · Southern Canal Co. v. State Board of Water Engineers
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“District Court jurisdiction consists of exclusive, appellate, and original jurisdiction of all actions, proceedings, and remedies, except in cases where exclusive, appellate, or original jurisdiction may be conferred by this Constitution or other law on some other court, tribunal, or administrative body.”); State v. Morales, 869 S.W.2d 941, 942 (Tex. 1994) (”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“such other courts as it may deem necessary and prescribe the jurisdiction and organization thereof. . . .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. In Re DW
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.