Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 35 N.M. 267 - Villareal v. Billings

Villareal v. Billings’s Empirical Analysis

1930

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
December 1968
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently December 1968

8 state decisions

401930194019501960decided

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 C. W. Kettering Mercantile Co. v. Sheppard

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

  1. ““There was evidence that the cost of digging the unused holes was $82.50. If $105 was included in the judgment for this item, as appellee himself claims it was, and as seems probable, it is excessive to the extent of $22.50. This excess, however, is not available as error because appellant failed to call the trial court’s attention to it.””
    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.