Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 181 SW2D 919 - Oakley v. Kent

Oakley v. Kent’s Empirical Analysis

1944

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
November 1983
most recently cited

5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently November 1983

5 state decisions

3019441950196019701980decided

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 Arnold v. Leonard · Crampton v. Zabriskie · W.D. Yett, Mayor v. Cook · Clark, Sheriff v. Finley, Comptroller · City of Austin v. McCall

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

  1. “Section 35. Subjects and titles of bills. Section 35. No bill (except general appropriation bills, which may embrace the various subjects and accounts, for an on account of which monies are appropriated) shall contain more than one subject, which shall be expressed in its title. But if any subject shall be embraced in an act, which shall not be expressed in the title, such act shall be void only as to so much thereof, as shall not be expressed.”
    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.