Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 72 KAN 95 - State v. Lackey

State v. Lackey’s Empirical Analysis

1905

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
2
states following
January 1987
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently January 1987

9 state decisions

40190519101920193019401950196019701980decided

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 City of Sedan v. Church · State v. Abbott · State v. Stickney · State v. Smith · Clark v. Norman

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

  1. ““The granting or refusal of a new trial is largely within the discretion of the trial court. The court sees and hears the witnesses, and has a better opportunity to know whether justice has been done than this court can have, and its ruling on such a motion has something of the standing of a finding of fact deduced from conflicting evidence and should not be disturbed except for error of law or for a manifest disregard of facts amounting to an abuse of discretion. (City of Sedan v. Church, 29 Kan. 190 ; Investment Co. v. Hillyer, 50 Kan. 446 , 31 Pac. 1064 ; Shepard v. Lynch, 26 Kan. 377 .)” (p. 99.)”
    2 later decisions 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.