Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 32 KAN 142 - Prescott v. Leonard

Prescott v. Leonard’s Empirical Analysis

1884

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
2
states following
April 1963
most recently cited

4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently April 1963

4 state decisions

10188418901900191019201930194019501960decided

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.

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

  1. “"... All findings of fact are necessarily mere conclusions or inferences drawn from the evidence; that is, drawn from other facts. It is therefore not a valid objection to a finding that it is the finding of a compound fact, or a complex fact, or a comprehensive fact, and including many minor and subordinate facts; or that it is a conclusion or an inference from the evidence or from other facts, for all findings must necessarily be subject to these same objections. ( Railroad Co. v. Plunkett, 25 Kan. 188 .) The finding, though a general one, is a conclusion of fact of a complex character, drawn from a variety of other facts more simple and less complicated in their nature...." (l.c. 145.)”
    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.