Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 49 WVA 453 - State v. Chilton

State v. Chilton’s Empirical Analysis

1901

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
3
states following
November 1994
most recently cited

19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently November 1994

19 state decisions

401901191019201930194019501960197019801990decided

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 The Floyd Acceptances · Johnson v. Burns · Delafield v. State · Mayor of Baltimore v. Eschbach · State ex rel. Blakeman v. Hays

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

  1. ““Infinite authority exists for the law proposition that the powers and duties of all governmental officers ‘are limited and defined by laws,’ by statute where one exists as in this case. It is the sole criterion of authority, and no custom can enlarge or vitiate it. The Floyd Acceptances, 7 Wall. 666 [ 19 L.Ed. 169 ]. This usage theory was assigned in the case just cited to bind the government to commercial paper accepted by the secretary of war, as it had been the custom for the secretary to make such acceptances; but the court repudiated the doctrine upon the fixed principle that such custom could not prevail against law. The court said that such unauthorized acts by an officer, however frequent, could not stand as a foundation for the authority assumed. Such a practice — I will not call it ‘custom or usage’ — such a personal practice of individual secretaries, cannot be upheld by this court, because contrary to the plain import of the statute, and calculated to encourage loose official practice entailing loss on the state.””
    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.