Irwin v. Lámar’s Empirical Analysis
1964
Citation profile
23 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently February 1986
23 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 Sellman v. Haddock · Posey v. Dove · Bogle v. Potter · Southern California Petroleum Corp. v. Royal Indemnity Co. · Sproles v. McDonald
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * . We have consistently indicated that Supreme Court Rule 15(14) (§ 21-2-1 (15)(14), N.M.S.A. 1953), requiring a statement of the points relied upon for reversal, does not contemplate such a general attack as appellant makes here, but demands the errors claimed to be specifically stated and argued. See Petty v. Williams, 71 N.M. 338 , 378 P.2d 376 ; Town of Mesilla v. Mesilla Design Center & Book Store, Inc., 71 N.M. 124 , 376 P.2d 183 .””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Riggsbee
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.