Beckish v. Manafort’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
160 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 160 later decisions — most recently December 2009 · most notably Jolly, Inc. v. Zoning Board of Appeals (1996), Bakelaar v. City of West Haven (1984)
160 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 Sheridan v. Planning Board · Nader v. Altermatt · Hughes v. Town Planning & Zoning Commission · City of New Haven v. Public Utilities Commission · Hartford Kosher Caterers, Inc. v. Gazda
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 160 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"[F]irst, `the party claiming aggrievement must successfully demonstrate a specific personal and legal interest in the subject matter of the decision, as distinguished from a general interest, such as is the concern of all members of the community as a whole. Second, the party claiming aggrievement must successfully establish that this specific personal and legal interest has been specially and injuriously affected by the decision.' Nader v. Altermatt, 166 Conn. 43 , 51 , 347 A.2d 89 [1974]."”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage“The question of aggrievement is essentially one of standing; unless the plaintiff could establish that she was aggrieved by the decision of the state standards committee, she had no standing to appeal. . . . The trial court must be satisfied, first, that the plaintiff alleges facts, which, if proven, would constitute aggrievement as a matter of law, and, second, that the plaintiff proves the truth of those allegations. . . . `The mere statement that the appellant is aggrieved, without supporting allegations as to the particular nature of the aggrievement, is insufficient. . . .' [Citations omitted.]”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“`Pleading and proof of aggrievement [are] prerequisite[s] to a trial court's jurisdiction over the subject matter of an appeal.'”
5 later decisions 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.