Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 18 NH 173 - Lord v. State

Lord v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1846

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
3
states following
October 2009
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2009

2 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

1018461850186018701880189019001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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.

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.

  1. “undoubtedly it is competent to the respondent, when a witness is called in such a cáse to be examined against him, to except that such witness is not named in the list furnished to him, for the purpose of excluding the testimony of that witness.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “he may object, when the case is called, to proceeding with the trial until the requisition of the statute is complied with;”
    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.