Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 234 Ark. 443 - Shroeder v. Johnson

Shroeder v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

1962

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
1
states following
December 2013
most recently cited

28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently December 2013 · most notably West v. State (1973), Henslee v. Kennedy (1977)

28 state decisions

120196219701980199020002010decided

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 Vaughan v. State · Kansas City Southern Railway Co. v. Murphy · Ness v. Males · Hughes v. State · Briley v. White

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

  1. ““ ‘We have held that the statutory obligation to yield the right of way at a stop intersection, imposed upon the unfavored driver, is not discharged by a mere stop but extends to the entire passage across the favored highway, and that the favored driver using a through highway is not required to slow down at an intersection or bring his vehicle under such control as to be able to stop, upon the assumption that an unfavored driver will fail in his duty.’ ””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““In the.case under consideration, as in most situations of this nature, we cannot say with certainty that the jurors were prejudiced by the reference to the ‘rap sheet, ’ but we are less sure that they were not. Definitely the manner in which the reference was made was improper, and it left open to the jury a broad field of speculation as to appellant’s character and possibly his criminal record. The admonition of the court did not tell the jury what and to whom the ‘rap sheet’ referred, and if it had done so the prejudice probably would have been even greater.””
    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.