State Ex Rel. Eichenbaum v. Cochran’s Empirical Analysis
1959
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently June 2002
1 federal appellate · 19 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 45 So. 2d 499 - Firemans Fund Ins. Co. of San Francisco v. Boyd · 82 So. 2d 513 - Mayer v. Dade County · State Ex Rel. First Presbyterian Church v. Fuller · State Ex Rel. First Presbyterian Church v. Fuller · State Ex Rel. Norman v. Holmer
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"* * * the regulation and control of the alcoholic beverage business is peculiarly a legislative function. In this connection, as in all similar situations, when the legislative branch of the government exercises a legislative power in the form of a duly enacted statute or ordinance it is not the function of a court to explore the wisdom or advisability of the enactment in order to bring its enforceability into question. To this end the limits of the court's authority is to measure the validity of the legislative enactment by the requirements of the controlling law. If those standards are met the legislation should be upheld." State ex rel. Eichenbaum v. Cochran, Fla., 114 So.2d 797, 800 .”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“"Ordinance No. 60 46 "An ordinance amending Section 33-150(E) (9) of the Code of Metropolitan Dade County, Florida (zoning code) to increase the distance requirements for package stores in shopping centers. "Be it ordained by the Board of County Commissioners of Dade County, Florida: "Section 1. Section 33-150(E) (9) of the Code of Metropolitan Dade County, Florida, presently providing as follows: "(9) Package Stores in Shopping Centers in BU-2 District. Package stores in shopping centers in a BU-2 (special business) or more liberal district containing a net ground building area of not less than eight acres including dedicated rights-of-way under one ownership with an improved building area of not less than 65,000 square feet of floor area thereon, and with an improved and developed parking area of not less than 350 vehicles. Only one such package store will be permitted in the shopping center. Said package store shall be at least 500 feet from any church, school or other licensed alcoholic beverage establishment measured as otherwise provided in this section." [Italics supplied.] is hereby amended and modified to read as follows: "(9) Package Stores in Shopping Centers in BU-2 District. Package stores in shopping centers in a BU-2 (special business) or more liberal district containing a net ground building area of not less than eight acres including dedicated rights-of-way under one ownership with an improved building area of not less than 65,000 square feet of floor area th”
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.