Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 173 IND 564 - Smith v. Stephens

Smith v. Stephens’s Empirical Analysis

1910

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
3
states following
December 1996
most recently cited

17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently December 1996

17 state decisions

80191019201930194019501960197019801990decided

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 Barbier v. Connolly · State Railroad Tax Cases Taylor Collector et al. v. Secor et al. · Hayes v. State of Missouri · Missouri v. Lewis · Chicago Burlington and Quincy Railroad Company v. Iowa

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

  1. ““In making the assessment the taxing officers added to the nominal surplus of the bank $14,800 invested in real estate, which was clearly erroneous under any theory of the law. In such a case, where the sum invested in real estate is deducted from the capital stock or surplus, before or in making the return, the assessed value of the real estate should not be deducted in fixing the value of the stock, because, if it is eliminated from one side of the account it should not be included in the other.” (p. 573.)”
    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.