State v. Shaw’s Empirical Analysis
1909
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently April 1970
11 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 Monroe v. May, Weil & Co. · Nagle v. Tieperman · State v. Young · Going v. Orns · Parker v. Bates
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““. . . In the first place there are no common-law offenses in this state; they are all statutory. (The State v. Young, 55 Kan. 349 , 40 Pac. 659 .) The crime of arson is fully defined by statute, and the language used indicates quite clearly that it was not intended by the enactment of this statute merely to adopt the common-law definition of that offense. The two differ materially. . . .” (p. 397.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Parrish“"Every person who shall willfully set fire to or bum in the nighttime, any . . . barn, . . ■. of another, . . . not the subject of arson in the first or second degree, shall on conviction be adjudged guilty of arson in the third degree.” (R. S. 21-507.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Craig
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.