Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 232 MO 49 - State v. Eckhardt

State v. Eckhardt’s Empirical Analysis

1910

Citation profile

24
cited by 24 later decisions
7
states following
August 2008
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 22 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently August 2008

2 federal appellate · 22 state decisions

601910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Shannon v. People · Southwest Missouri Light Co. v. Scheurich · Greeley v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co. · Gabriel v. Mullen · State v. Balch

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

  1. ““Endlich on the Interpretation of Statutes, Section 409, says: ‘Further, the general principle in question applies only where the specific words are all of the same nature. Where they are of different genera, the meaning of the general word remains unaffected by its connection with them. Thus, where an act made it penal to convey to a prisoner, in order to facilitate his escape, “any mask, dress, or disguise, or any letter, or any other article or thing, ’ ’ it was held that the last general terms were to be understood in their primary and wide meaning, and as including any article or thing whatsoever which could in any manner facilitate the escape of a prisoner, such as a crowbar. [Reg. v. Payne, L. R. 1 C. C. 27.] ’ “The great fundamental rule in the construction of statutes is to ascertain and give effect to the intention of the Legislature. For the purpose of discovering the legislative intent it is proper, and often necessary, to consider the history of the statute, the reason for its enactment, and the prior state of the law on the subject to which the statute relates.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““It is very clear to us that the principle of ejusdem generis cannot be applied here, nor yet the doctrine of noscitur a sociis, for the words ‘street’ and ‘field,’ appearing in the statute, are'not even remotely related, and neither derives any color from association with the other, but each stands as the representative of a distinct class. The meaning, then, of the general expression ‘or other place,’ in the statute is not restricted or affected by the preceding particular words, which ‘signify subjects greatly different from one another.’ ” [State v. Eckhardt, 232 Mo. 49 , l. c. 53, 133 S. W. 321 .]”
    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.