Welch v. Durand’s Empirical Analysis
1869
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 district · 22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2005 · most notably Smith v. Wade (1983), Alaimo v. Royer (1982)
1 federal appellate · 2 district · 22 state decisions — followed in 12 states
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In this case the defendant was guilty of wanton misconduct and culpable neglect. The latter is expressly found by the court and would justify the judgment, but the former is shown by the facts. . . . Shooting at a mark is lawful, but not necessary, and may be dangerous, and the law requires extraordinary care to prevent injury to others; and if the act is done where there are objects from which the balls may glance and endanger others, the act is wanton, reckless, without due care, and grossly negligent.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the doing what one pleases, without regard to the rights of others.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. . Brigman“malicious or wanton misconduct or culpable neglect,”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Dang v. Cross
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.