State v. Conkling’s Empirical Analysis
1861
Citation profile
28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently November 1986 · most notably 19 Cal. 2d 634 - County of Los Angeles v. Frisbie (1942), 10 Cal. 2d 160 - Penziner v. West American Finance Co. (1937)
28 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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 Pierpont v. Crouch · State v. Poulterer · City & County of Sacramento v. Bird
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Every statute must be considered according to what appears to have been the intention of the Legislature, and, even though two statutes relating to the same subject be not in terms repugnant or inconsistent, if the latter statute was clearly intended to prescribe the only rule which should govern in the case provided for, it will be construed as repealing the original act.” (Underscoring by the writer.)”
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.