Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 248 Mich. 272 - People v. Stimer

People v. Stimer’s Empirical Analysis

1929

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
4
states following
August 1972
most recently cited

11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently August 1972

11 state decisions

60192919301940195019601970decided

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 People ex rel. Drake v. Mahaney · Sheldon v. Village of Kalamazoo · People v. Shuler · Attorney General ex rel. Fuller v. Parsell · Fornia v. Wayne Circuit Judge

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

  1. “Except to the extent that it was expressly done by a provision in the act of 1921, we do not understand that there was any attempt or intention thereby to revise, alter, or amend the provisions of the act of 1919. By the express terms of the 1921 enactment, the department of animal industry was abolished; and the powers and duties of that department were transferred to the State department of agriculture. The portion of Act No. 181, Pub. Acts 1919, which prescribes these powers and duties was not `revised, altered, or amended.' It still stands as a part of the statutory law of the State, and therefore there was no occasion for the re-enactment or republication of that portion of the statute.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “In so far as the act under consideration revises, alters or amends Act No. 181, Pub. Acts 1919, it does so in express language, published at length; and in so far as the change or alteration is by implication merely, it does not offend the constitutional provision.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““No law shall be revised, altered or amended, by reference to its title only; but the act revised and the section or sections of the act altered or amended shall be reenacted qnd published at length. ’ ’”
    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.