Gordon v. Conner’s Empirical Analysis
1938
Citation profile
21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently January 2008
21 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 Wade v. Board of Com'rs of Harmon County · Dolezal v. Bostick · Reeves v. Noble · Leard v. Askew · State Ex Rel. Moore v. O'Bannon
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Where there are two statutes upon the same subject, the earlier being special and the later general, the presumption is, in the absence of an express repeal, or an absolute incompatibility, that the special is to remain in force as an exception to the general.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“"The sheriff, however, relying upon the provisions of the special act, appointed six deputies. In this action plaintiffs seek to recover for the county, a sum equal to the salaries paid to the two deputies from July 1, 1933, to the date of filing the suit (April 27, 1936), and a similar sum for their own use and benefit. "The trial court held that the special act was unconstitutional, but further held that the case of Wade v. Board of Commissioners of Harmon County, 161 Okl. 245 , 17 P.2d 690 , was controlling of the issues involved herein. In that case, it was held: `The members of the board of county commissioners of a county will not be penalized ... for the payment of salaries to county officers under an unconstitutional local act where such payments were made in good faith and before the law is declared unconstitutional, or before they are advised by the proper official as to its unconstitutionality.' "No contention is made that defendants were ever advised by the proper officials as to the unconstitutionality of the special act. Plaintiffs take the position that since this court on several occasions has held similar acts to be unconstitutional, the defendants, being chargeable with a knowledge of the law, are chargeable with knowledge of the unconstitutionality of the special act involved herein. We cannot concur in this contention. The unconstitutionality of the special act involved herein had never been judicially established. Defendants were entitled to rely thereon ”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The trial court held that the special act was unconstitutional, but further held that the case of Wade v. Board of Commissioners of Harmon County, 161 Okl. 245 , 17 P.2d 690 , was controlling of the issues involved herein. In that case, it was held: `The members of the board of county commissioners of a county will not be penalized ... for the payment of salaries to county officers under an unconstitutional local act where such payments were made in good faith and before the law is declared unconstitutional, or before they are advised by the proper official as to its unconstitutionality.'”
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.