State v. Linderholm’s Empirical Analysis
1913
Citation profile
17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently February 1989
17 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 Christisen v. Bartlett · Martindale v. Battey · State v. Linderholm · In re Hornung · United Zinc & Chemical Co. v. Morrison
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It never was contemplated that the entry of a solemn judgment of a court of record could be made to depend upon the whim or caprice of an attorney upon one side or the other of a cause or upon the failure of the attorneys on opposing sides to agree to the form of the judgment. The duty of the clerk is to make a true record of the order or judgment of the court. If for any reason the record fail to speak the truth, the court at any time may make an order correcting the same. This has been often decided (and cases cited).” (p. 492.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Gates v. Gates““All judgments and orders must be entered on the journal of the court, and specify clearly the relief granted or order made in the action.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Gates v. Gates
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.