Phillips v. Gallagher’s Empirical Analysis
1898
Citation profile
2 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently August 1968
2 district · 6 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 5 E.H. Smith 359 - In Re Objections to the Certificate of Nomination of Fairchild · State ex rel. Childs v. Kiichli · Manston v. McIntosh · People ex rel. Simpson v. Board of Police Com'rs
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.
““But such rules have only a limited application to a political convention, which has control over its own proceedings and officers, in the absence of any statutory regulations, and may proceed according to party usages and customs. The questions which such a convention deals with are essentially political, and it would be a menace to the right of the members of a political party to select their own party nominees, and to the respect which should be entertained for judicial tribunals, for the courts to review and reverse the proceedings of a political convention, in the absence of fraud or oppression on its part or of its officers. “The delegates in a nominating convention meet for the purpose of selecting and agreeing upon candidates for office, to be supported by the party. The discharge of this duty involves the exercise of judgment and discretion on the part of the members of the convention, and a majority of them have, in the absence of fraud or oppression, the right to control the action of the convention, and to correct or reverse any action taken by it. Such a convention is a deliberative body, and unless it acts arbitrarily, oppressively or fraudulently, its final determination as to candidates, or any other question of which it has jurisdiction, will be followed by the courts. See State [ex rel. Childs] v. Kiichli, 53 Minn. 147, 154 , 54 N. W. 1069, 1070 , 19 L. R. A. 779; Manston v. McIntosh, 58 Minn. 525, 528 , 60 N. W. 672, 673 , 28 L. R. A. 605; In re Fairchild, ”
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.