Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 80 KAN 783 - In re Hanson

In re Hanson’s Empirical Analysis

1909

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
November 1949
most recently cited

5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently November 1949

5 state decisions

3019091910192019301940decided

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 55 Ohio St. 183 - H. B. Clafflin Co. v. Evans · In re Shortridge · State v. Thomas · In re Millington · Howbert v. Heyle

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

  1. ““If courts were limited in their power to enforce proper orders, as urged here, contumacious witnesses could effectually impede and embarrass them to such an extent as practically to prevent the administration of justice.” (In re Hanson, 80 Kan. 783, 787 , 105 Pac. 694 .)”
    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.