Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 489 S.W.2d 95 - Thompson v. Calvert

Thompson v. Calvert’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
February 1995
most recently cited

5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently February 1995

5 state decisions

30197219801990decided

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 Nebbia v. People of State of New York · Wylie v. Hays · Calvert v. Thompson · McCauley v. Hobbs Trailers

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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “"It is shown in the record that in 1969 the Legislature, in response to a trend of increasing violence and other illegal activity which centered around taverns and night clubs, created a special committee to study the problem. That committee determined that some of those engaged in the coin-operated machine business had gained a great deal of control over and financial interest in certain alcoholic beverage businesses. Art. 13.17 was then passed....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. Taylor v. State
  2. “". . . to provide comprehensive regulation of music and skill or pleasure coin-operated machines and businesses dealing in these machines, and to prevent persons in these businesses from having certain concurrent financial interests in, or unauthorized financial dealings with, certain alcoholic beverage businesses."”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. Taylor v. State
  3. “clear legislative intent of the Act (Art. 13.17, V.A.T.S.) was to regulate those engaged in the business of dealing in coin-operated machines. . . .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. Taylor v. State

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.