Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 226 Ky. 633 - Schultz, Superintendent v. Ohio County

Schultz, Superintendent v. Ohio County’s Empirical Analysis

1928

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
1
states following
January 2015
most recently cited

19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently January 2015

19 state decisions

1301928193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Commonwealth v. International Harvester Co. · Sewell v. Bennett · Commonwealth v. Barnett · Head v. Commonwealth · Thomas v. Hurst Home Insurance

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

  1. “[tjhis universal rule means that the courts will construe the acts if possible so that both shall be operative and effective if that can be done without contradiction or absurdity. If any part of the existing law can be reconciled or harmonized with the provisions of the new act it will not be deemed as having been repealed.”
    2 later decisions 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.