Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 4 Okla. Crim. 1 - Stack v. State

4 Okla. Crim. 1 - Stack v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1910

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
1
states following
October 2009
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently October 2009

9 state decisions

401910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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

  1. ““There is plenty of evidence in the record to the effect that Stermer was working for Stack, and that the latter was running a saloon in the city of Lawton; that he was engaged in that business before statehood, and had continued in the business ever since; that his place of business was frequented by a drinking class; that people continually brought liquor out of his place of business, and were often seen to leave there in an intoxicated condition. The evidence was amply sufficient for the jury to have found that Stermer was working for Stack, and that he was Stack’s agent in the sale of this whis-ky, and that said sale was made in the course of Stack’s business.””
    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.