Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 266 Ky. 529 - Thompson v. Commonwealth

Thompson v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

1936

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
2
states following
October 2008
most recently cited

23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently October 2008

23 state decisions

8019361940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Smith v. Commonwealth · Hanley v. City of Medford · Richie and Griffith v. Commonwealth · Daniel v. Commonwealth

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

  1. “To constitute a lawful court, * * * the persons who assume to hold such court and dispense justice must be officially assembled under authority of law, and the court must be held at the appropriate time and place appointed by law therefor. If the person assuming to act as judge was not then invested with judicial authority (that is, with the power of the law to declare and record its mandates), then his acts in attempting so to do are of no consequence whatever, and are void. And if he were fully invested with judicial authority, so as to make his pronouncement of the law effective, still the time and place of holding the court are equally essentialfor, when the law prescribes the time and place for the holding of court, then time and place are as essential limitations of jurisdiction as are subject-matter and parties.”
    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.