Riverside Township v. Bailey’s Empirical Analysis
1910
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently December 1959
8 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 State v. Balliet · Butler v. Kaulback · Leavenworth, Northern & Southern Railway Co. v. Wilkins · Gilchrist v. Schmidling · State v. Everett
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““During this hearing the defendants were challenged to point out to the court wherein the verdict was excessive or erroneous, as alleged in the motion. This they declined and failed to do, and the court for this reason denied the application.' This refusal on the part of the defendants’ attorney was alone sufficient to justify the court in denying the motion for a new trial, and sufficient to constitute a waiver of any error which the court might have committed in the decision. It is the duty of every attorney engaged in the presentation of a cause to a court to assist in reaching a just conclusion, by stating fully and frankly to the court, when requested, all that he knows about the question under consideration. With such a statement the court might be able to grant the relief at once and save further delay and expense. A court has the right, upon such an application, to have the errors complained of pointed out fully and clearly, and concealment or evasion of pertinent facts by the attorney is a violation of professional duty which will justify a refusal of the order requested. (The State v. Everett, 62 Kan. 275 ; The State v. Balliet, 63 Kan. 707, 710 .)” (p. 431.)”
2 later decisions 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.