Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 4 IND 305 - Jonhs v. Gavins

Jonhs v. Gavins’s Empirical Analysis

1853

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
September 1978
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently September 1978

9 state decisions

301853186018701880189019001910192019301940195019601970decided

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 Whittam v. Young

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

  1. ““By the common law, a statute took effect at once throughout the jurisdiction to be governed by it. So it did under our former constitution, where there was no express legislative direction on the subject. In England, a statute took effect from the first day of the session of parliament enacting it. In this state, under the former constitution, from the time it was ‘published in print, by authority, at any place within the state.’ Tredway v. Gapin, 1 Blackf. 299 . It had, however, before the framing of the new constitution, become a common practice for the legislature to provide that laws should take effect in each county when filed therein, thus producing, for a considerable length of time, an entire want of uniformity in the laws in force. “In this state of things, the constitutional convention framed the provision we have quoted, declaring that no law should take effect till it was ‘published’ and ‘circulated’ (two words, as here used, meaning the same thing) ‘in the several counties of this state;’ and we think the intention was to arrest the piecemeal mode in which laws had, for a time, been brought into operation, and to make their taking effect a single entire thing throughout the state. It seems to us that the language of the constitution will fairly admit of no other construction. It speaks of no partial taking effect of a law, no coming into force in the different or several counties, but it speaks of its taking effect as a single event, after distribution in the se”
    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.