Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 62 NJL 664 - Parks v. State

Parks v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1899

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
October 1951
most recently cited

2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 1951

2 state decisions

101899190019101920193019401950decided

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

  1. “When the Supreme. Court, by virtue of its superintending power over inferior courts, brings, by certiorari, into it the proceedings of an inferior court upon an indictment, it has the option, at its discretion, to retain the cause and proceed to a final disposition of the issues presented, or to remit the proceedings to the inferior cotut. Gen. Stat. 368. Had the Supreme Court retained the cause now before us, it is obvious that no final judgment could have been reached until the accused had been convicted and sentenced or acquitted and discharged by that court.. It is equally plain that, after the exercise of its option of remitting the proceedings to the sessions, rio final judgment in the cause could have been reached until a similar result had been reached in that court. A certiorari in such cases is not the institution of a new suit, nor does it bring in question any final judgment. The result is that this writ was prematurely issued and must be dismissed.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.