Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 211 MISS 518 - In re Bishop

In re Bishop’s Empirical Analysis

1951

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
1
states following
February 2015
most recently cited

8 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently February 2015

8 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

601951196019701980199020002010decided

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 Ekern v. McGovern · Biggs v. McBride · Ham v. Board of Police · Rutter v. Burke · State ex rel. Attorney-General v. Johnson

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

  1. “Every sheriff shall have power to appoint one or more deputies to assist him in carrying out the duties of his office, every such appointment to be in writing, to remove them at pleasure, and to fix compensation, subject to the budget for the sheriffs office approved by the county board of supervisors.... All sheriffs shall be liable for the acts of their deputies, and for money collected by them. The circuit court, after a notice and a hearing, shall have power to remove such deputies and also bailiffs, upon a showing that the public interest will be served thereby.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Had the Legislature intended that the power of the court for removal should be “at pleasure”, it could easily have said so. The fact that it did not do so — that it used different language in vesting the power — is evidence that the power of the court is not the same as that of the sheriffs. 52 So.2d at 20 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “the power of removal at pleasure is much greater in the appointing agency then in the removing agency not having the power of appointment.”
    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.