Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 147 U.S. 190 - Illinois Cent Co v. City of Decatur

Illinois Cent Co v. City of Decatur’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

87
cited by 87 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
27
states following
July 2006
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 1 district · 64 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 87 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2006 · most notably Berryman v. Board of Trustees of Whitman College (1912), Wardman-Justice Motors, Inc. v. Petrie (1930)

4 federal appellate · 1 district · 64 state decisions — followed in 27 states

210189019001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Loan Association v. Topeka · McGee v. Mathis · City of Bridgeport v. New York & New Haven Railroad · City of Chicago v. Larned · White v. People ex rel. City of Bloomington

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 87 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Special assessments are a peculiar species of taxation, standing apart from the general burdens imposed for state and municipal purposes and governed by principles that do not apply generally. The general levy of taxes is understood to exact contributions in return for the general benefits of government, and it promises nothing to the persons taxed beyond what may be anticipated from an administration of the laws for individual protection and the general public good. Special assessments, on the other hand, are made upon the assumption that a portion of the community is to be specially and peculiarly benefitted, in the enhancement of the value of property peculiarly situated as regards a contemplated expenditure of public funds; and in addition to the general levy, they demand that special contributions, in consideration of the special benefit, shall be made upon the persons receiving it. The justice of demanding the special contribution is supposed to be evident in the fact that the persons who are to make it, while they are made to bear the cost of a public work, are at the same time to suffer no pecuniary loss thereby, their property being increased in value by the expenditure to an amount at least equal to the sums they are required to pay. This is the idea that underlies all these levies.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““The general assembly may vest the corporate authorities of cities, towns and villages with power to make local improvements by special assessment, or by special taxation of contiguous property, or otherwise. ***.” (111. Const. 1870, art. IX, sec. 9.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the enhancement of value being the consideration for the charge, * * *.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.