Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2007 OK 29 - Terry v. Bishop

Terry v. Bishop’s Empirical Analysis

2007

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
April 2014
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Mitan v. United States · Tanner v. United States · In Re Initiative Petition No. 349, State Question No. 642 · Oliver v. City of Tulsa · In Re Initiative Petition No. 382

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

  1. “''The Legislative authority of the State shall be vested in a Legislature, consisting of a Senate and a House of Representatives; but the people reserve to themselves the power to propose laws and amendments to the Constitution and to enact or reject the same at the polls independent of the Legislature, and also reserve power at their own option to approve or reject at the polls any act of the Legislature."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “Our decision in Granger [ v. City of Tulsa, 1935 OK 801 , 174 Okla. 565 , 51 P.2d 567 ] is consistent with the holding in State v. Coyle, 1912 OK CR 126 , 7 Okla.Crim. 50 , 122 P. 243 which recognized the fundamental constitutional principle that a legislative body may not irrevocably bind its successors.”
    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.