State Ex Rel. Holmes v. Denson’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently June 2016 · most notably Meshell v. State (1987), Dickens v. Court of Appeals for the Second Supreme Judicial District of Texas (1987)
2 federal appellate · 37 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.
Relationships
Relies on Garcia v. Dial · Ordunez v. Bean · Garcia v. Laughlin · State Ex Rel. Vance v. Routt · State Ex Rel. Vance v. Hatten
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“determine all essential questions ‘and to do any and all things with reference thereto authorized by the Constitution and statutes, or permitted district courts under established principles of law. A Court’s having jurisdiction embraces everything in the case and every question arising which can be determined in the case, until it reaches its termination and the jurisdiction is thereby exhausted.’”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Rosenbaum“... whether a trial judge may go beyond his order dismissing criminal indictments and instruct the district attorney not to further proceed with future charges arising from the same? We answer in the negative and we specifically hold that respondent usurped his authority in invading the exclusive province of the applicant [the State].”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Roberts“Since respondent has lost any jurisdiction over ... [the cases], and since the only manner in which respondent might re-obtain jurisdiction of these cases would be the return of grand jury indictments into respondent's court, we hold that there is nothing to mandamus, ergo mandamus does not lie.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Homan v. Hughes
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.