Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 246 NW2D 236 - State v. Noonan

State v. Noonan’s Empirical Analysis

1976

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
October 2005
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently October 2005

9 state decisions

601976198019902000decided

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 Woosley v. United States · Wendel v. Swanberg · Rath v. Sholty · State v. Peckenschneider · State v. Cole

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

  1. “The term discretion itself involves the idea of choice, of an exercise of the will, of a determination made between competing considerations. In order to have an “abuse” in reaching such determination, the result must be so palpably and grossly violative of fact and logic that it evidences not the exercise of will but perversity of will, not the exercise of judgment but defiance thereof, not the exercise of reason but rather of passion or bias. . .. [citing authority].”
    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.