Smith v. Head’s Empirical Analysis
1943
Citation profile
6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
April 1968
most recently cited
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Pettis v. Johnston · Lind v. Stubblefield · Vinson v. Oklahoma City · Yahola Oil Co. v. Causey · Claussen v. Amberg
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.
““ * * * if it shall be made to further appear by the affidavit of the holder of the tax certificate * * * that the owner or owners of the real estate are nonresidents of the state, or that the residence or place of business of such owner or owners is not known to the holder of such tax certificate, and cannot be ascertained by any means within the control of such holder of the tax certificate, and that the holder of such tax certificate cannot by the exercise of reasonable diligence make service upon such owner within the state, then in such cases, service shall be made by publication * * *. All service and return shall be made in the same manner as that of summons in courts of record. * * * ” (Emphasis added.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Robinson v. Rockett““There is a clear distinction between the action of a county treasurer, a ministerial officer, in issuing a tax deed without complying with the statutes, and a judgment of the court without the filing of such an affidavit. Vinson v. Oklahoma City, 179 Okla. 590 , 66 P. 2d 933 . In case of a judgment where the journal entry recites that affidavit and proof of publication has been examined and approved by the. court, there is in effect an adjudication that there has been compliance with the statute and the judgment is valid unless the judgment roll affirmatively negatives the effect of the recital. Pettis v. Johnston, 78 Okla. 277 , 190 P. 681 ; Yahola Oil Co. v. Causey, 181 Okla. 129 , 72 P. 2d 817 .””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hammer v. Baldwin
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.