State v. Springer’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 65 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 68 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably State v. Williams (1981), American Oil Co. v. Valenti (1979)
3 federal appellate · 65 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 State v. McClain · State v. McClain · State v. Bass · Transport Indemnity Company v. Seib · State v. McClain
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 68 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the computerized entries were made in the regular course of business, (2) at or near the time of the transaction involved, and (3) a proper foundation for such evidence is laid by testimony of a witness who is familiar with the computerized records and the methods under which they were made so as to satisfy the court that the methods, the sources of information, and the time of preparation render such evidence trustworthy.”
12 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Crawley · State v. Jackson“[a]n affidavit from the custodian of the records in question that states that the records are true and correct copies of records made, to the best of the affiant’s knowledge, by persons having knowledge of the information set forth, during the regular course of business at or near the time of the acts, events or conditions recorded[.]”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“§ 14-113.9. Financial transaction card theft. — (a) A person is guilty of financial transaction card theft when: (1) He takes, obtains or withholds a financial transaction card from the person, possession, custody or control of another without the card-holder’s consent and with the intent to use it; or who, with knowledge that it has been so taken, obtained or withheld, receives the financial transaction card with intent to use it or to sell it, or to transfer it to a person other than the issuer or the cardholder ...”
2 later decisions 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.