Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 202 SW 160 - Grayson County v. Harrell

Grayson County v. Harrell’s Empirical Analysis

1918

Citation profile

42
cited by 42 later decisions
3
states following
December 1977
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 41 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently December 1977 · most notably Grant v. Michaels (1933), Brazos River Conservation & Reclamation Dist. v. Harmon (1944)

1 federal appellate · 41 state decisions

1301918192019301940195019601970decided

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 City of Austin v. Nalle · City of San Antonio v. Talerico · 17 Tex. Civ. App. 210 - Johnson v. Holland · 50 Tex. Civ. App. 519 - City of Paris v. Sturgeon · Gillis v. Rosenheimer

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

  1. ““It would be dangerous to hold that the commissioners’ court could recite in its order for the election one purpose or proposition, and by some other action or order, not made a part thereof, and not referred to in the official notice of the election, inject into the proposition limitations or conditions so that the actual result of the election would be to carry a different proposition from that actually voted on according to the official record and notices of the proposition submitted.” Grayson County v. Harrell, 202 S. W. 160 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““ * * * but it has been held that ‘the abuse of discretion, to justify interference with the exercise of discretionary power, implies not merely error of judgment, but perversity of will, passion, prejudice, partiality, or moral delinquency.’ ””
    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.