Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 602 N.E.2d 507 - Willner v. State

Willner v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
August 2017
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently August 2017

8 state decisions

40199220002010decided

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 Watts v. Indiana · Ulmer v. State · Jones v. State · Colvin v. State · Greichunos v. State

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

  1. “Any golfer in the rough of a hole which runs parallel to another should, as a matter of law, know the dangers of approaching golfers. To be surprised that approaching drivers hook or slice is akin to being surprised that not everyone shoots par. We have said often that 'there comes a point where this Court should not be ignorant as judges of what we know as men [or women].' This is a shining example of the application of that maxim.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[aln information alleging a time outside the statute of limitations which does not allege facts sufficient to constitute an exception to the statute is subject to a motion to dismiss.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Generally, the State is required to allege facts in the Information sufficient to bring the charge within the statutory limitation period.”
    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.