Baker v. White’s Empirical Analysis
1933
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently June 2015 · most notably Pike v. George (1968), St. Luke Hospital, Inc. v. Straub (2011)
3 federal appellate · 30 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 Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company v. City of Goldsboro · New Orleans Water-Works Co v. Louisiana Sugar Refining Co · Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. Minnesota ex rel. City of Duluth · Northern Pacific Rallway Company v. State of Minnesota Ex Rel City of Duluth · Mullins v. Nordlow
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[a] person injured by the violation of any statute may recover from the offender such damages as he sustained by reason of the violation, although a penalty or forfeiture is imposed for such violation.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“In harmony with the foregoing rules of construction prescribed by the Legislature, this court has consistently held that, in the interpretation and construction of statutes, words and phrases employed by the lawmaking body must be given their plain and ordinary meaning according to popular usage, (citations omitted), unless they have acquired a technical sense, in which event, they will be given such accepted technical meaning. (Citations omitted). Applying either the general rule or the exception to the word “statute” as used in section 466, supra, it is apparent that it cannot be construed to include within its scope and meaning a municipal ordinance, since according to common usage and understanding, the former term applies to laws enacted by the supreme lawmaking body of the state, while the latter is commonly understood to mean an enactment of the council of a municipal corporation, a subdivision of the state, and applying solely to the government of such municipality; and, if classified as coming within the exception as a technical word or one that has acquired a peculiar meaning, the former does not, when so regarded, become any more comprehensive. (Emphasis added).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Alderman v. Bradley“[I]n the interpretation and construction of statutes, words and phrases employed by the lawmaking body must be given their plain and ordinary meaning according to popular usage, unless they have acquired a technical sense, in which event, they will be given such accepted technical meaning.”)). . Black’s Law Dictionary 1222 (7th ed.) .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Caldwell v. Chauvin
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.