Borton v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1952
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently July 1979
10 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 Weisenberger v. State · Vinnedge v. State · State v. Rodgers
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In Borton v. State (1952), 230 Ind. 679 , 106 N. E. 2d 392 , we pointed out that the 1927 Act was enacted for the purpose of creating a new and distinct offense. We said that the 1927 Act states all of the elements of the offense and pointed out that the offense defined by the 1927 Act ‘is not for executing a check, when there are insufficient funds in the bank to pay it. The offense is for executing a check ‘knowing at the time’ of such execution that the maker ‘has not sufficient funds in or credit with such bank . . . for the payment of such check, ... in full upon its presentation ....’””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Woodall v. State
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.