Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 75 KAN 269 - State v. Plamondon

State v. Plamondon’s Empirical Analysis

1907

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
November 1972
most recently cited

3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently November 1972

3 state decisions

1019071910192019301940195019601970decided

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 State v. Thomas · Noftzger v. Moffett · State ex rel. Curtis v. Durein

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

  1. ““The right of the court to give judgment for an attorney’s fee is also questioned. The statute expressly authorizes an award for attorney’s fees in a suit for abating and enjoining a nuisance. ... A like statute has been held to justify an allowance of an attorney’s fee as a part of the costs in a proceeding for contempt which is incidental to a suit for an injunction. (The State, ex rel., v. Durein, 46 Kan. 695 , 27 Pac. 148 .) It is argued that the statute referred to provides only for an award of attorney’s fees in suits for injunctions, but does not cover proceedings for contempt. The proceeding for contempt, although criminal in its nature, is an incident to, and one of the final steps in, the suit for an injunction. It was remarked by Mr. Justice Porter, in the recent case of The State v. Thomas, 74 Kan. 360 , 86 Pac. 499 , that ‘the proceeding is a part of the original case and the court properly took judicial notice of the previous order granted in that case.’ ” (p. 272.)”
    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.