Hepp v. Boulder County Assessor’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
4 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 7 U.S.C. § 1 (CFTC Reauthorization Act of 1995)
Relies on Estate of Stevenson Ex Rel. Talovich v. Hollywood Bar & Cafe, Inc. · Regional Transportation District v. Lopez · Washington County Board of Equalization v. Petron Development Co. · Douglas County Board of Equalization v. Clarke · Board of Assessment Appeals v. Sampson
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“because during 2006(1) neither taxpayer nor its lessee Miller used the subject property as a farm or ranch, and (2) the subject property was not in the process of being restored through conservation practices (meaning the subject property was not”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Under the applicable statutory scheme, taxpayer [has] the burden of proof to show any qualifying uses of [its] land in the relevant years in support of [its] claims for agricultural classification.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“any agricultural classification for the subject parcels must be based on the foregoing statutory criteria rather than on any non-statutory equitable considerations,”
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.