Lanier v. Overstreet’s Empirical Analysis
1965
Citation profile
43 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently April 2005 · most notably 176 So. 2d 81 - Walter v. Schuler (1965), 354 So. 2d 368 - Straughn v. Tuck (1977)
43 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 State Ex Rel. Attorney General v. City of Avon Park · Schleman v. Connecticut General Life Insurance · Hayes v. Walker · 156 So. 2d 833 - Tyson v. Lanier · State v. City of Miami
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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"By authorizing tax assessors to consider, as one of the factors `[i]n arriving at a just valuation' of property, the use to which the property `can be expected to be put in the immediate future' (emphasis added), the Legislature has, under the familiar rule of expressio unius est exclusio alterius, prohibited tax assessors from considering potential uses to which the property is reasonably susceptible and to which it might possibly be put in some future tax year or, even, during the current tax year. To be considered, the use must be expected, not merely potential or a `reasonably susceptible' type of use; it must be expected immediately, not at some vague uncertain time in the future ..." (emphasis theirs)”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage“"* * * [T]here is nothing in the legislative regulations respecting the `just valuation' of taxable property to authorize the assessment of property in accordance with a potential use which might be made of the property at some future time. * * * all of the legislative directives in this field appear to have been designed to make sure that, in doubtful areas, the assessment will be made on the basis of the actual use to which the property is designed to be put during the particular tax year."”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“"* * * no preferential treatment has been accorded the agriculturist who desires to retain his property as such as against the encroachment of an expanding urban community. If and when he puts his agricultural land on the market for sale for a `higher and better" use or, at least, one more valuable than agricultural use the property would no doubt no longer qualify as one `being used' for the agricultural purposes named in the statute and thus not within the intendment thereof."”
2 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.