Goodson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
66 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 66 later decisions — most recently November 2017 · most notably Loisel v. Rowe (1995), In re Romance M. (1994)
66 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.
Relationships
Relies on State v. Curcio · United States v. Euge · Monroe v. Monroe · Union Texas Petroleum v. Corporation Commission of Oklahoma · Shays v. Local Grievance Committee
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 66 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[M]ootness implicates the jurisdiction of the court. It is a well-settled general rule that the existence of an actual controversy is an essential requirement to appellate jurisdiction; it is not the province of appellate courts to decide moot questions, disconnected from the granting of actual relief or from the determination of which no practical relief can follow. . . . In the absence of an actual and existing controversy for us to adjudicate . . . the courts of CT Page 10754 this state may not be used as a vehicle to obtain judicial opinions upon points of law. . . .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“must look to additional factors to determine whether [it] should decide the issue even though it may have no immediate practical consequences to a party. . . . Some of those factors include whether the issue (1) could affect an ongoing program of the state penal or civil system, (2) could affect the complaining party in the future, and (3) involves a matter of public importance. . . . No one factor is controlling, nor must all of the above factors be present. To decide the applicability of the exception, [the court] must instead review the circumstances of each case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The courts of this state may not be used as a vehicle to obtain judicial opinions upon points of law . . . and where the question presented is purely academic, we must refuse to entertain the [suit].”
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.