Caesar v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently August 2014
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 12 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 In Re Hubbard · 47 Cal. 2d 177 - Hall v. City of Taft · United Tavern Owners v. Philadelphia School District · Luhrs v. City of Phoenix · 75 Wash. 2d 629 - Nordstrom v. White Metal Rolling and Stamping Corp.
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.
“Where it can be inferred from a state statute that the state has intended to fully occupy or preempt a particular area, to the exclusion of [local governmental entities], a [local] ordinance in that area will be held to be in conflict with the state law, even if the state law does not so specifically state.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage““Our analysis of this issue necessarily involves a review of the basic tenets of municipal corporation law. Idaho has long recognized the proposition that a municipal corporation, as a creature of the state, possesses and exercises only those powers either expressly or impliedly granted to it. [Citations omitted.] ... Thus, under [the] rule, a municipal corporation may exercise only those powers granted to it by either the state constitution or the legislature and the legislature has absolute power to change, modify or destroy those powers at its discretion. State v. Steunenberg, 5 Idaho 1, 4 , 45 P. 462, 463 (1896).””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““The [local governmental entity] cannot act in an area which is so completely covered by general law as to indicate that it is a matter of state concern.” Caesar, 101 Idaho at 161 , 610 P.2d at 520 .”
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.