In re Ross’s Empirical Analysis
1892
Citation profile
4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently August 2019
4 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.
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he two versions [English and Hawaiian] constitute but one act. There is no dual legislation. As a rule one version is the translation of the other. The effort is always made to have them exactly coincide, and the legal presumption is that they do.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[o]f necessity ... to record transactions of the government in its various branches, because the very ideas and principles adopted by the government [came] from countries where the English language [was] in use.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“use of the Hawaiian language in any instance”
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.