State v. Newcomb’s Empirical Analysis
2016
Citation profile
10
cited by 10 later decisions
2
states following
May 2019
most recently cited
10 state decisions
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Oregon law simultaneously limits ownership and possessory rights in ways that it does not for inanimate property .... Live animals under Oregon law are subject to statutory welfare protections that ensure their basic minimum care, including veterinary treatment. The obligation to provide that minimum care falls on any person who has custody and control of a dog or other animal. A dog owner simply has no cognizable right , in the name of [his or] her privacy, to countermand that obligation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“as background relevant to an overall understanding of the animal welfare laws and the policies that current and past statutes reflect”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“an opaque inanimate container in which inanimate property or effects were being stored.”
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.