Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 21 Wash. 339 - Baggot v. Turner

Baggot v. Turner’s Empirical Analysis

1899

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
July 1972
most recently cited

5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently July 1972

5 state decisions

20189919001910192019301940195019601970decided

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 State v. Carroll · Moses v. Tompkins

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. ““It is further contended by the appellant that the redemption should not be allowed for the reason that the appellant was not notified of the intention of the respondent Turner to redeem. We are not entirely satisfied that the notice was not given to the appellant in this case, but, conceding that it was not, there are two answers to this assignment of error. The first is, that the record shows that he actually had notice, and appeared within the time and opposed the redemption.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““One who actually performs the duties of an office, with apparent right and under claim and color of an appointment or election.””
    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.