Walker v. Schneider’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably Medical Arts Clinic, P.C. v. Franciscan Initiatives, Inc. (1995), Rueckert v. Rueckert (1993)
31 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 County of Stutsman v. State Historical Society of North Dakota · State v. Iverson · Laubisch v. Roberdo · Jones v. State · 80 Wis. 2d 332 - Wittke v. State Ex Rel. Smith
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“As discussed below, a handful of state courts have concluded that refiling undermines the magistrate's authority and therefore should not be permitted unless the prosecution offers substantial additional evidence. A few others have adopted provisions that preclude refilling, but give the trial court authority to allow the filing of an information notwithstanding the magistrate's rejection of a bindover, upon. a factually supported allegation of sufficient evidence. The vast majority, however, permit refiling at will, including refiling on the same evidence before a different magistrate, absent proof that the prosecutor's purpose is to harass the defendant. Although rulings sustaining such authority commonly point to the prosecution's lack of authority to appeal the dismissal in the particular state, the authority to refile without new evidence is also recognized in some of the states that allow a prosecution appeal. In many jurisdictions, support for unlimited refiling also is found in preliminary hearing provisions which specifically state that a dismissal "shall not preclude the state from instituting a subsequent prosecution for the same offense."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Rathbun v. State““[T]he State is expressly authorized to appeal from an order dismissing a criminal complaint. NDCC 29-28-07(1); State v. Swanson, 407 N.W.2d 204 (N.D.1987); State v. Hanson, 252 N.W.2d 872 (N.D.1977). Thus, the State is not precluded from appealing from a district court’s dismissal of a complaint on review of a magistrate’s adverse determination on probable cause.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. State v. Serr“good cause to continue a preliminary hearing for further investigation might exist when a prosecutor innocently miscalculates the quantum of evidence required to obtain a bindover and further investigation clearly would not be dilatory.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Morgan
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.