Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 365 P.2d 569 - Williams v. State

Williams v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1961

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
5
states following
May 1998
most recently cited

5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently May 1998

5 state decisions

201961197019801990decided

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 State v. Douglas · People v. Davis · Kossakowski v. People · Hopkins v. State · People v. Gordon

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

  1. “[without [a rule permitting jurisdiction to be established on the basis of duty to account] in many cases where embezzlement of funds is clear, there could be no conviction because of impossibility to prove just when and where the agent actually converted the funds or formed the intent to defraud, as in the case of an agent traveling through many counties bound to report collections and pay over funds collected at his principal’s place of business at stated intervals.”
    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.