Wiley v. Keokuk’s Empirical Analysis
1870
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 district · 39 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently September 2018 · most notably Wooderson v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp. (1984), Smith v. Printup (1993)
1 federal appellate · 1 district · 39 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.
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““7th. — ‘Whenever the elements of fraud, malice, gross negligence, or oppression mingle in the controversy, the law allows the jury to give what is called exemplary or vindictive damages.’ 8th. — ‘In cases of torts, and actions for false imprisonment, the jury are the only proper judges of how much the plaintiff ought to recover.’ ” (p. 106.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Glass v. Brunt
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.