Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2 WEND 419 - Hicok v. Coates

Hicok v. Coates’s Empirical Analysis

1829

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
3
states following
May 1909
most recently cited

1 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently May 1909

1 district · 4 state decisions

20182918301840185018601870188018901900decided

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

  1. ““Nor is it necessary that the delay should have been made with a view to defraud any one. Where the plaintiff in an execution directs an indefinite stay of proceedings, such direction is a supersedeas to the execution so far as third persons are concerned.””
    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.