Horkey v. Kendall’s Empirical Analysis
1898
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently January 1965
11 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 State ex rel. Graham v. Tibbets · Trumble v. Trumble · Miller v. Hurford · State ex rel. Miller v. Board of Commissioners · Touzalin v. City of Omaha
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 provisions of our Code as to the competency of officers administering oaths to affiants are substantially declaratory of the common law, and both at the common law and under statutes like ours it is very generally held that the making of an affidavit before an attorney in the case, if he be an officer generally authorized to take affidavits, is an irregularity merely, which must be attacked at once by motion, or it will be waived; and that such an affidavit is not a nullity. (Gilmore v. Hempstead, 4 How. Pr. (N. Y.) 153; Smith v. Ponath, 17 Mo. App. 262 ; Linck v. City of Litchfield, 141 Ill. 469 , 31 N. E. 123 ; Swearingen v. Howser, 37 Kan. 126 , 14 Pac. 436 ; Haward v. Nalder, Barnes (Eng.) 60.) * * * As pointed out in Swearingen v. Howser, supra, there is a clear distinction between the administration of an oath by one not authorized to administer oaths, and the administration of an oath by one generally authorized, but forbidden to do so in a particular case. In the first case no power exists, and the act is a nullity; in the other the power exists, but it has been wrongfully exercised.””
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.