Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 195 F.1d 627 - Ex parte Shores

Ex parte Shores’s Empirical Analysis

195 F. 627 · 1912

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
3
states following
April 2001
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently April 2001

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

501912192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Randolph v. Donaldson · State v. Davis · In re Birdsong · Riley v. Whittiker · Servis v. Marsh

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

  1. “In cases where a person is committed to prison pursuant to his conviction of a prison offense, the jailer has no discretion (except in cases of emergencies) but to obey the warrant of commitment. He may not rightly consult his own convenience, nor that of the prisoner, and permit the latter to leave the jail and return thereto at pleasure. Persons are committed to jail for the purpose of imposing upon them the penalties they have incurred because of their violations of the law; and it is not for the jailer to remit any part of that punishment. If sickness or other circumstances should arise which make it proper to grant the prisoner some indulgences, the jailer must apply to the proper authorities for permission to grant the same.”
    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.