Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 65 KAN 843 - Crouse v. Nixon

Crouse v. Nixon’s Empirical Analysis

1902

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
2
states following
April 1999
most recently cited

10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently April 1999

10 state decisions

201902191019201930194019501960197019801990decided

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 Knight v. Hirbour · Rosenthal v. State Board of Canvassers · Ellis v. Whitaker · Birket v. Elward · City of Leavenworth v. Finn

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

  1. ““It is not necessary for us to examine into the merits of the case, or, more accurately speaking, we cannot do so. The plaintiffs in error have appealed from an order to which they had already yielded obedience. That they cannot do. They cannot perform the required act and at the same time appeal from the order requiring its performance.” (p. 846.)”
    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.