Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 205 Okla. 346 - Busby v. Eaves

Busby v. Eaves’s Empirical Analysis

1951

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
July 1987
most recently cited

5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently July 1987

5 state decisions

201951196019701980decided

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 Sapulpa v. Young · Pennsylvania Co. v. Potter · Hill v. Persinger · American Surety Co. v. Marsh · Swartz v. Fariss

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

  1. ““That contention of fraud could be presented by timely action seeking the statutory remedy against the final decree so obtained in the county court.””
    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.