Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 35 KAN 271 - State v. Whisner

State v. Whisner’s Empirical Analysis

1886

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
10
states following
January 1992
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently January 1992

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 17 state decisions — followed in 10 states

50188618901900191019201930194019501960197019801990decided

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 Hurtado v. People of the State of California · Wilson · Foster Co v. State Johnston · Kalloch v. Superior Court · People ex rel. Lanphier v. Hatch

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

  1. ““The phrase ‘due process of law’ means law in its regular course of administration, according to prescribed forms and in accordance with the general rules for the protection of individual rights.” (Syl. If 2.)”
    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.