Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 89 MOAPP 186 - Haag v. Ward

Haag v. Ward’s Empirical Analysis

1901

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
May 1932
most recently cited

3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently May 1932

3 state decisions

101901191019201930decided

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 Barton v. Barbour · Smith v. St. Louis & San Francisco Railway Co. · Holloman v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. · Keen v. Breckenridge · Garver v. Kent

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 general rule is that in cases where a judgment of the justice is/ affirmed, as here, the appellant can have no adjudication in the circuit court as to the sufficiency of the statement filed with the justice unless he duly prosecute his appeal and by notice brings the appellee into the appellate court. (Citing cases.)””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.