Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 22 HAW 693 - Oyama v. Stuart

Oyama v. Stuart’s Empirical Analysis

1915

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
November 2002
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently November 2002

9 state decisions

301915192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Havemeyer v. Superior Court · Quimbo Appo v. . the People · St. Louis, Kennett & Southern Railroad v. Wear · In re Dole · Ex parte Walker

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

  1. “As a basis for the appointment of a receiver, the plaintiff must show, not only that he has an interest in or right to the fund or property, but that the possession of the property by the defendant was obtained by fraud; or that the property itself, or the income arising from it, is in danger of loss from the neglect, waste, misconduct or insolvency of the defendant.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.