Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 259 ALA 557 - Williams v. Wert

Williams v. Wert’s Empirical Analysis

1953

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
April 2018
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently April 2018

8 state decisions

401953196019701980199020002010decided

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 Coleman v. Mange · Gaines v. Malone · N. L. Pierce Nat. Detective Agency v. Pierce Detective Agency · Mead v. Eagerton

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

  1. “"The test, when a motion is made to dismiss an appeal because the right to an injunction, if it ever existed, has become moot, is whether the event which occurred pending appeal makes a determination of the appeal unnecessary, or renders it impossible for the appellate court to grant effectual relief."”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The court cannot enjoin an act which has occurred.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.