Calcutt v. . McGeachy’s Empirical Analysis
1938
Citation profile
1 district · 16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently September 2014
1 district · 16 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.
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The above definition manifests the intention of the Legislature to distinguish the bona fide merchandise vending machines, picture machines, music machines and machines of like character from well recognized types of gambling slot machines. The line of distinction is illustrated in the judgment below, wherein type 12 is separated from those types in which there is an element of chance in some form even though such element be only that of making varying scores or tallies on which wages may be made.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. . Abbott“the manufacture, sale, possession and use of slot machines, gambling apparatus and devices.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. . Abbott“the user may secure additional chances or rights to use such machine, apparatus or device.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. . Abbott
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.