Irwin v. Irwin’s Empirical Analysis
1965
Citation profile
24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently June 2020
24 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 Poafpybitty v. Skelly Oil Company · Rogers, County Treasurer v. Bass Harbour Co. · Pure Oil Co. v. Quarles · Lewis v. Lewis · State Ex Rel. Board of Ed. v. Morley
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"If the meaning of a portion of the statutory text is uncertain we may resort to the title of the act which serves as a valuable aid in interpreting the body and in determining legislative intent. This is especially proper in Oklahoma because our Constitution requires that the purpose of an act be clearly expressed in its title. [citations omitted]"”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Where the former statute was clear or its meaning had been judicially settled, the amendment may reasonably indicate legislative intent to alter the law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“‘[A] change of phraseology from that of the original act ... raise[s] the presumption that a change of meaning was also intended.’ ” 9 .”
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.