State v. Buckley’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 72 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 75 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Legislation must apply alike to all persons within a class, and reasonable grounds must exist for making a distinction between those within and those without a designated class. Within the limits of these restrictive rules, a legislative body has a wide measure of discretion.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 39 Ohio App. 3d 136 - Faulkner v. Mayfield · Hartford Fire Insurance v. Lawrence, Dykes, Goodenberger, Bower & Clancy

2. ““We think that aesthetic considerations can support these statutes, because interference with the natural aesthetics of the surrounding countryside caused by an unfenced or inadequately fenced junk yard is generally patent and gross, and not merely a matter of taste. * * *””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 55 Ohio App. 2d 27 - Sun Oil Co. v. City of Upper Arlington · 40 Ohio App. 2d 535 - P & S Investment Co. v. Brown

3. ““Sections 4737.05 to 4737.99, Revised Code, which require junk yards outside of a municipality to be obscured from the ordinary view of persons passing upon state, county and township roads, are a valid exercise of the police power although they are based upon aesthetic considerations.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 40 Ohio App. 2d 535 - P & S Investment Co. v. Brown