Wright v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1937
Citation profile
27 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently January 2003 · most notably McCanless, Com'r v. Klein (1945), Gatlinburg Beer Regulation Committee v. Ogle (1947)
27 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.
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he county court having the right to forbid such storage, sale or manufacture at places within two thousand (2,000) feet of such places of public gatherings in its discretion. (Emphasis supplied)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“There appears to be express authority of cities and towns to pass proper ordinances governing the issuance and revocation of licenses. There is express provision for cities and towns to impose additional restrictions, fixing zones and territories, providing hours of opening and closing, and such other rules and regulations as will promote public health, morals, and safety as they may by ordinance provide. If it were intended that the county court should exercise like authority and to make ordinances or resolutions beyond the provisions of the legislative act, this authority, we think, would not have been expressly given to municipal corporations without being given the county court. The language of the statute, granting such authority only to municipal corporations, seems upon its face to exclude county courts from making any regulation beyond the provisions of the statute. 106 S.W.2d at 870 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Howard v. Willocks“All incorporated cities, towns and Class B counties in the State of Tennessee are authorized to pass proper ordinances governing the issuance and revocation or suspension of licenses for ... the sale ... of beer within the corporate limits of the cities and towns and within the general services districts of Class B counties outside the limits of any smaller cities as defined in § 7-1-101(8) ... but the power of such cities, towns and Class B counties to issue licenses shall in no event be greater than the power herein granted to counties, but cities, towns and Class B counties may impose additional restrictions, fixing zones and territories and provide hours of opening and closing and such other rules and regulations as will promote public health, morals and safety as they may by ordinance provide.... Tenn.Code Ann. § 57-5-106(a).”
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.