Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 42 KAN 422 - State v. Jessup

State v. Jessup’s Empirical Analysis

1889

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
3
states following
July 2016
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently July 2016

8 state decisions

3018891890190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Baysinger v. People

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.

  1. ““We think that the averments of the information as made, were in legal effect equivalent to a charge that the barn, at the time of its destruction, was insured against loss or damage by fire. It is a principle -of pleading that whatever is included in, or necessarily implied from, an express allegation, need not be otherwise averred. (Baysinger v. The People, 115 Ill. 419 .) The defendant, the court and the jury all well understood from the information the offense with which the defendant was charged; this is too clear to admit of serious doubt.” (p.424.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.