State v. Daly’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently April 2015
4 federal appellate · 5 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1153
Relies on United States v. Antelope · United States v. Mathews · O'Leary v. United States · State v. Winckler · Mack v. United States
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The Court recognized as “conditions precedent” to the application of the doctrine of comity the following: 1. The foreign court actually had jurisdiction over both the subject matter and the parties; 2. The decree was not obtained fraudulently; 3. The decree was rendered by a system of law reasonably assuring the requisites of an impartial administration of justice — due notice and a hearing; and 4. The judgment did not contravene the public policy of the jurisdiction in which it is relied upon.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. St. Cloud“federal courts are the ultimate decision maker as to whether federal, state or tribal courts have jurisdiction in a particular Indian law case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Perank
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.