Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 18 WVA 1 - Vinal v. Core

Vinal v. Core’s Empirical Analysis

1881

Citation profile

89
cited by 89 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
15
states following
June 2025
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 1 district · 79 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 89 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2025 · most notably Burnham v. Superior Court of Cal., County of Marin (1990), 145 W. Va. 696 - Earl T. Browder, Inc. v. County Court of Webster County (1960)

2 federal appellate · 1 district · 79 state decisions — followed in 15 states

190188118901900191019201930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Skagit Railway & Lumber Co. v. Cole · Sweeney v. Baker · Maughlin v. Perry · Coleman v. Southwick · Israel v. Brooks

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 89 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““The court further instructs the jury that, if every man who suffers by the perpetration of a crime were, under the penalty of heavy damages, to ascertain before he commences a prosecution that he has such evidence as will insure conviction, few prosecutions would likely be set on foot. The guilty would escape while conclusive evidence was sought for. Offenses of every kind would for the most part go unpunished, and the penal law would be scarcely more than a dead letter.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.