Harris v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1942
Citation profile
6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently May 1979
6 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 Carmichael v. Southern Coal & Coke Co. · Friedman v. American Surety Co. of New York
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(a) Any employing unit which is or becomes an employer subject to this Act within any calendar year shall be subject to this Act during the whole of such calendar year. “(b) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (c) of this section, an employing unit shall cease to be an employer subject to this Act only as of the 1st day of January of any calendar year, if it files with the Commissioner prior to the 5th day of January of such year, a written application for termination coverage, and the Commissioner finds that there were no twenty different days, each day being in a different week within the preceding calendar year, within which such employing unit employed eight or more individuals in employment subject to this Act. For the purpose of this subsection, the two or more employing units mentioned in paragraph (2) or (3) or (4) of section 19 (f) shall be treated as a single employing unit.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage““* * * a construction of the provision which would permit termination of coverage by one appearing on the records of the Commission as an employer subject to the Act in some other manner of ‘substantial compliance’ could only lead to difficulty and confusion in the administration of the Act. “Clearly appellant did not apply for termination of his coverage. And since his status upon the records of the Commission was that of an employer ■'subject to the Act for the year 1937, such status continued throughout the period involved in this suit.” (Italics ours.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cohen v. State
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.