Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2006 WI 99 - State v. Campbell

State v. Campbell’s Empirical Analysis

2006

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
1
states following
November 2018
most recently cited

16 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1738A

Relies on Faretta v. California · Gideon v. Wainwright · McKaskle v. Wiggins · United States v. Scheffer · Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co.

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

  1. “A court's 'competency,' as the term is understood in Wisconsin, is not jurisdictional at all, but instead, is defined as 'the power of a court to exercise its subject matter jurisdiction' in a particular case.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[e]xcept as otherwise provided by law, the [trial] court shall have original jurisdiction in all matters civil and criminal within this state.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “'attempt to avoid, evade or deny the force and effect of a judgment in an indirect manner and not in a direct proceeding'”
    2 later decisions 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.