Saylor v. Gray’s Empirical Analysis
1933
Citation profile
6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently February 1966
6 state decisions
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 Orme v. Salt River Valley Water Users' Ass'n · Slosser v. Salt River Valley Canal Co. · Citrus Growers' Development Ass'n v. Salt River Valley Water Users' Ass'n · Bethune v. Salt River Valley Water Users' Ass'n · Greene & Griffin Real Estate & Investment Co. v. Salt River Valley Water Users' Ass'n
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The defendant contends that the construction of the charter by this court in the Orme Case, supra, no longer obtains for the reason that the association on February 24, 1923, amended its charter by extending its life for twenty-five years from that date; that the effect of such amend ment was as though it had accepted from the state a new charter, subject to the laws of the state governing private corporations in existence at the time of renewal, and not the laws at the date of its original organization. This question is purely academic under the facts in this case and its decision therefore is not necessary. If the association was engaged in the business of an ordinary private corporation, and if the renewal of its charter had the effect of accepting a new charter from the state, it may be conceded that its charter powers would be found in the laws in existence at the time of the renewal * * (Emphasis added.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Art. 14, § 10 Constitution of Arizona “§ 10. Elections for directors or managers “Section 10. In all elections for directors or managers of any corporation, each shareholder shall have the right to cast as many votes in the aggregate as he shall be entitled to vote in said company under its charter multiplied by the number of directors or managers to be elected at such election; and each shareholder may cast the whole number of votes, either in person or by proxy, for one candidate, or dis-; tribute such votes among two or more such candidates; and such directors or managers shall not be elected otherwise.””
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.