Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 183 Ark. 659 - Poe v. Walker

Poe v. Walker’s Empirical Analysis

1931

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
September 1967
most recently cited

6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently September 1967

6 state decisions

201931194019501960decided

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 McConnell v. Bourland · Chatfield v. Jarratt · Moline Lumber Co. v. Harrison

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

  1. ““While it does appear that the cause was submitted to and heard by the court on February 17, 1930, at which time the court’s finding on the facts was indicated, yet it also appears that no memorandum was made in the order book or judge’s docket or on any other record of the Pulaski Chancery Court showing a final disposition of the case and the relief granted until May 9, 1930, when the decree to be entered was approved by the presiding judge and entered of record. “It is required by § 2140, Crawford & Moses’ Digest, that appeals and writs of error shall be prosecuted within six months next after the rendition of the judgment, order or decree sought to be reviewed, and this statute was construed in the case of Chatfield v. Jarrett, 108 Ark. 523 , 158 S. W. 146 , to mean that the time for appeal begins to run from the date of the rendition or pronouncement of the judgment, order or decree, and not from the entry thereof upon the records of the Court. But by § 6276 Crawford & Moses’ Digest, it is provided that ‘the judgment must be entered on the order book, and specify clearly the relief granted or other determination of the action.’ In the recent case of McConnell v. Bourland, 175 Ark. 253 , 299 S. W. 44 , we said that: ‘There are authorities to the contrary, but we hold that, when a decision has been reached, announced by the court and sufficient memorandum on the chancery docket to show a final settlement of the case, it is a final judgment although it has not been spread in”
    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.