Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 29 COLO 137 - Haynes v. Briscoe

Haynes v. Briscoe’s Empirical Analysis

1901

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
May 1929
most recently cited

1 district · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Hall v. Kearny · Johnson v. Young

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

  1. ““In this construction of the statute my associates do not concur. They are of opinion that the notice itself is fatally defective in that it does not specify the amount of money spent upon each claim, nor the facts which might excuse expenditure upon each claim. All the members of the court agree that the ease should be affirmed. My associates do not place upon the statute a different construction than that mentioned in the opinion, but base their judgment of affirmance upon the grounds mentioned. I do not insist that the notice is sufficient, but think the judgment should be affirmed upon the theory adopted by the trial court.” (Italics ours.)”
    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.