Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 627 So. 2d 355 - Beatty v. State

627 So. 2d 355 - Beatty v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

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

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently April 2017

8 state decisions

40199320002010decided

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 South Carolina v. Gaillard · Deposit Guaranty Bank & Trust Co. v. Williams · Stone v. Independent Linen Service Co. · 512 So. 2d 1271 - State Ex Rel. Pittman v. Ladner · City of Clarksdale v. MS. POWER & LIGHT

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. “Many decisions in this state have affirmed the rule, which generally prevails, that the effect of a repealing statute is to abrogate the repealed statute as completely as if it had never been passed, and that a statute modifying previous statute has the same effect as though the statute had all the while previously existed in the same language as that contained in the modified statute, unless the repealing or modifying statute contains a saving clause. [Citations omitted]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “"When cases are in the bosom of this Court and there is involved a statute that is modified prior to a final decision of this Court, we take that modification into consideration." Bell v. Mitchell, 592 So.2d 528 (Miss.1991), citing Parker v. Bailey, 437 So.2d 33 (Miss.1983).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “An amended act is ordinarily construed as if the original statute had been repealed, and as far as any action after the adoption of the amendment is concerned, as if the statute had been originally enacted in its amended form.”
    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.