Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 29 WYO 287 - State v. Kusel

State v. Kusel’s Empirical Analysis

1923

Citation profile

50
cited by 50 later decisions
7
states following
May 2023
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 49 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently May 2023 · most notably Anita Harmon, as an Individual and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Euella Potter (2014), Fuller v. State (1977)

1 federal appellate · 49 state decisions

13019231930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Lamar v. United States · Frost v. Witter · O'Brien v. People ex rel. Kellogg Switchboard & Supply Co. · In re Robinson · State v. Bartlett

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

  1. “Jurisdiction of the subject-matter and of the parties is the right to hear and determine the suit or proceeding in favor of or against the respective parties to it. The facts essential to invoke jurisdiction differ materially from those essential to constitute a good cause of action for the relief sought. A defective petition in bankruptcy, or an insufficient complaint at law, accompanied by proper service of process upon the defendants, gives jurisdiction to the court to determine the questions involved in the suit, although it may not contain averments which entitle the complainant to any relief; . . . . Facts indispensable to a favorable adjudication or decree include all those requisite to state a good cause of action, and they comprehend many that are not essential to the jurisdiction of the suit or proceeding. * * * The facts which conditioned the jurisdiction of the court were the filing of the petition and the service of the subpoena. [citation omitted]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““Counsel for defendant did not object to the fact that the county attorney of Platte county, rather than the county attorney of Laramie county, filed and subscribed the amended information. The lower court’s attention was not called to the incompetency of the former in filing and subscribing it. The point appears not to have been raised in the lower court at all. ’ ’”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “the power of the court over cases of a certain class.”
    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.