Moore v. Grillis’s Empirical Analysis
1949
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently April 2017 · most notably United States of America Ex Rel. Robert Lee Goldsby v. William Harpole, Superintendent of the Mississippi State Penitentiary, Parchman, Mississippi (1959), 539 So. 2d 1338 - Hall v. State (1989)
5 federal appellate · 30 state decisions
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 Barbier v. Connolly · New State Ice Co. v. Liebmann · Noble State Bank v. Haskell · Harry Gundling v. City of Chicago · Louis Liggett Co v. Baldridge
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“construe the law and apply it to the case presented and determine whether the Constitution of this State authorizes the legislation.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“"The effect of the act is that in a growing, expanding, and lucrative field of usefulness of accountants, power is given a board in which accountants have control, to restrict their number, and tends toward a monopoly. It deprives those desiring an audit the right of contract in matters purely of private concern, and deprives accountants not certified of the enjoyment of the gains of their own industry guaranteed to them by the Bill of Rights, in that it denies to them the right to follow the occupation for which they have qualified themselves by the expenditure of time and toil."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“"We do not say that it is beyond the power of the General Assembly to enact a statute requiring that no one shall use the term `certified public accountant' or the term `public accountant' without having met the requirements of such an act. Such a provision may well be within the power of the Legislature on the ground that it is to the public interest that no one shall use a term indicating that he has been examined and certified as an accountant when such is not the fact. * * * Such is a misrepresentation which the Legislature may prevent by statute."”
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.