Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 1999 MT 113 - State v. Spina

State v. Spina’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

52
cited by 52 later decisions
1
states following
March 2026
most recently cited

50 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently March 2026 · most notably State v. Aragon (2014), Cole v. Valley Ice Garden, L.L.C. (2005)

50 state decisions

2001999200020102020decided

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 Washington v. Davis · Steer, Inc. v. Department of Revenue · Interstate Production Credit Ass'n v. Desaye · State v. Armstrong · State v. Sullivan

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

  1. “First, the law may establish the classification "on its face." This means the law by its own terms classifies persons for different treatment ... Second, the law may be tested in its "application." In these cases the law either shows no classification on its face or else indicates a classification which seems to be legitimate, but those challenging the legislation claim that the governmental officials who administer the law are applying it with different degrees of severity to different groups of persons who are described by some suspect trait ... Finally, the law may contain no classification, or a neutral classification, and be applied evenhandedly. Nevertheless the law may be challenged as in reality constituting a device designed to impose different burdens on different classes of persons.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““It is a basic equal protection principle that the invidious quality of a law claimed to be discriminatory must ultimately be traced to an impermissibly discriminatory purpose.” [State v.] Spina, ¶ 85 [ 1999 MT 113 , 294 Mont. 367 , 982 P.2d 421 ] (citing Washington v. Davis (1976), 426 U.S. 229, 240 , 96 S.Ct. 2040, 2048 , 48 L.Ed.2d 597, 607-08 ). None exists here.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “it is not supported by substantial evidence, the court has misapprehended the effect of the evidence, or our review of the record convinces us that a mistake has been committed.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.