State v. Cooley’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

24 state decisions

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

1. ““ ‘Application was made in each instance for issuance of the lease, the requirements of the act were complied with, and a 12-year lease, not a 25-year renewal lease, was issued to each of the previous lessees. These were applied for, issued, accepted, and retained knowingly under the act of 1947, by all who were in any way interested in and concerned with them. The judicial declaration that the automatic renewal plan of 1947 was invalid effectively disposed of any and all alleged rights of appellants granted by, applied for, and accepted by them under that act. The law of this state has always been that an unconstitutional statute is a nullity, is void from its enactment, and is incapable of creating any rights or obligations. Finders v. Bodle, 58 Neb. 57 , 78 N. W. 480 ; Whetstone v. Slonaker, 110 Neb. 343 , 193 N. W. 749 ; Lennox v. Housing Authority of City of Omaha, 137 Neb. 582 , 290 N. W. 451 . ■ ‘“* * * There was a sufficient distinction between the situation of persons holding leases on state school lands under the statute in force prior to 1947 where oppor tunity had been afforded for the presentation of bids by third parties, and those who applied for and accepted renewal leases under the act of 1947 where the making of 'any bids by third parties was barred, to allow the .state to treat them as different classes. “ * * It was the decision of the court in the Ebke case that gave the renewal leases their status of legal nullity, and not the action of the board in ente”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Board of Educational Lands and Funds v. Gillett

2. “The general management of all lands and funds set apart for educational purposes, and for the investment of school funds, shall be vested, under the direction of the Legislature, in a board of five members to be known as the Board of Educational Lands and Funds. The members shall be appointed by the Governor with such qualifications and for such terms and compensation as the Legislature may provide.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State Ex Rel. Spire v. Beermann