Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 32 SC 171 - Archer v. Long

Archer v. Long’s Empirical Analysis

1890

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
2
states following
August 1997
most recently cited

4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently August 1997

4 state decisions

1018901900191019201930194019501960197019801990decided

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. ““Now, it will be observed that in the first branch of the section, which relates to the form of the verdict in respect to the value of the property sued for, the language is imperative, ‘shall assess the value of the property;’ but in the other branch of the section relating to the damages sustained by the taking or detention of the property, the language is permissive only, — ‘may at the same time assess the damages.’ This necessarily implies that property sued for in an action of this kind always has a value which must be assessed by the jury, but that there may or may not, be damages in a given case, and hence the jury is not required, but is permitted, to assess such damages as may have been proved.””
    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.