Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 56 Ariz. 106 - Graham v. Moore

Graham v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis

1940

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
1
states following
December 1994
most recently cited

22 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently December 1994

22 state decisions

60194019501960197019801990decided

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 Territory of Arizona ex rel. Sherman v. Board of Supervisors · Campbell v. Hunt · Sims Printing Co. v. Frohmiller

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

  1. ““The writ of mandamus is an extraordinary and expeditious legal remedy which proceeds upon the assump tion that the applicant has an immediate and complete legal right to the thing demanded. Campbell v. Hunt, 18 Ariz. 442 , 162 P. 882 . As against public officers in particular, it is issued only to compel the performance of an act which the law especially enjoins as a duty arising out of the office. Territory [ex rel. Sherman] v. Board of Supervisors, 2 Ariz. 248 , 12 P. 730 . If such officer is not specifically required to perform the duty or has any discretion as to what shall be done, the writ does not lie. Collins (Board of Supervisors) v. Krucker, [56] Ariz. [6], 104 P.2d 176 . * * * ” (Emphasis supplied.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““The Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction in habeas corpus, and quo warranto and mandamus as to all state officers. * * * ” “The Supreme Court shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine all causes between counties concerning disputed boundaries and surveys thereof, or concerning claims of one county against another. * * * ””
    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.