Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 4 WYO 49 - Neer v. Cowhick

Neer v. Cowhick’s Empirical Analysis

1892

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
3
states following
February 2012
most recently cited

5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently February 2012

5 state decisions

201892190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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

  1. “We are forced to the position that the statute relating to proof of holographic wills does not dispense with the necessity of witnesses to them, and that as to such wills the former statute, providing that wills must be witnessed by two competent witnesses, is still in force.”
    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.