State v. Allen’s Empirical Analysis
1916
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently December 1967
9 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. Pfefferle · State v. Bland · State of Kansas v. Marshall · State v. Yarborough · State v. Newton
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““There is a complaint that the jury was not selected according to law. The court sustained the defendant’s challenge to the array, and discharged the panel because the original names in the jury box had not been selected from the assessment rolls of the previous year. Thereupon the judge proceeded to select a jury for the term, following the provisions of section 4624 of the General Statutes, of 1909, which requires the judge to select a sufficient number of jurors for the term and to name those selected, whenever for any cause the lists have been improperly returned. It is contended that the township trustees should have been summoned and required to select the lists of jurors. Aside from the fact that such a method would have been cumbersome and the cause of unnecessary delay, the procedure which the court followed is authorized by the section of the statute just cited. It was so decided in the case of The State v. Schmidt, 74 Kan. 627 , 87 Pac. 742 . In the opinion in that case the distinction between the situation here and that involved in The State v. Edwards, 64 Kan. 455 , 67 Pac. 834 , cited in support of defendant’s contention, was pointed out. Moreover, there is nothing to indicate that defendant suffered any prejudice by the manner in which the jurors were selected.” (Our italics.) (p. 785-786.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Neff““On an appeal, the court must give judgment without regard to technical errors or defects, or to exceptions which do not affect the substantial rights of the parties.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Neff
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.