Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 290 SW2D 474 - Pearson v. Commonwealth

Pearson v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

1956

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
March 1975
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently March 1975

5 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

30195619601970decided

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 Marcum v. Wallace · McIntosh v. Armour Co. of Illinois · Foster v. Buchannan · Robinson 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““ * * *. So, a party desiring to prosecute an appeal in forma pauperis should first make application to that end in the circuit court, and if it is denied and he desires to pursue the matter further, to file in this court a certified copy of that record of the circuit court and a motion for a rule against the clerk or official stenographer or both to show cause why they or either of them should not furnish without cost to the appellant such parts of the record in the principal case as it is their duty to prepare and furnish. If satisfied prima facie of the movant’s right, this court will issue a rule and consider the response of the officials and take such action as is deemed proper on the showing made. Marcum v. Wallace, 240 Ky. 444 , 42 S.W.2d 531 ; McIntosh v. Armour & Co., 279 Ky. 517 , 131 S.W.2d 393 .””
    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.