Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 196 Va. 651 - Davis v. Hackney

Davis v. Hackney’s Empirical Analysis

1955

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
2
states following
August 1995
most recently cited

6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently August 1995

6 state decisions

3019551960197019801990decided

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 Wheeler v. Flintoff · Winder v. . Penniman · Malloy v. Brewer

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. “The [law] was in furtherance of the common law rule and did not supplant it. Its purpose was to compel the attendance of nonresident witnesses in criminal proceedings, granting them immunity from the service of process while in attendance upon the court_ The reason behind the common law and the reason behind the Uniform Act is to secure the attendance of witnesses in courts to give testimony free from intimidation or embarrassment by being served with process in matters which arose before the witness entered the state.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “If a person comes into this State in obedience to a summons directing him to attend and testify in this State he shall not while in this State pursuant to such summons be subject to arrest or the service of process, civil or criminal, in connection with matters which arose before his entrance into this State under the summons.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “for the better protection of the courts in the administration of justice, and to prevent the intimidation of suitors, solicitors and witnesses, and the disturbance of officers of the court in the performance of their duties. It is primarily for the protection of courts, the privilege to the individual is merely incidental.”
    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.