State v. . Estes’s Empirical Analysis
1923
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently March 2013
11 state decisions
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““* * * We do not hold that actual violence or demonstration of force is indispensable to such obstruction or interference. To ‘interfere’ is to check or hamper the action of the officer, or to do something which hinders or prevents or tends to prevent the performance of his legal duty; and to ‘obstruct’ signifies direct or indirect opposition or resistance to the lawful discharge of his official Duty. * *”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“We have endeavored to consider the appeal entirely in its legal aspect, but we cannot refrain from expressing our unqualified condemnation of the defendant's coarse and obscene language. It was worse than reprehensible ; it was utterly without color of excuse or ground of condonation.”
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.