Heckler v. Conter’s Empirical Analysis
1933
Citation profile
65 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 65 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably 41 Cal. 3d 883 - Young v. Haines (1986), Collins v. Day (1994)
65 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 Fountain Park Co. v. Hensler · Gentile v. State · School City of Rushville v. Hayes · Wayne Township v. Brown · Bullock v. Robison
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 65 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““But in such cases the classification must not be capricious or arbitrary, but must be just and reasonable, and based upon substantial distinctions germane to the subject matter and the object to be obtained. The distinctions must involve something more than mere characteristics which will serve to divide or identify the class. There must be inherent differences in situation related to the subject-matter of the legislation which require, necessitate or make expedient different or exclusive legislation with respect to the members of the class. The classification must embrace all who possess the attributes or characteristics which are the basis of the classification, and their difference from those excluded must be substantial and related to the purpose of the legislation.” Henry Heckler v. Herman L. Conter, Treas., et al. (1933), 206 Ind. 376, 381 , 187 N. E. 878 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““The law is clearly local and special. There is no difficulty in conceiving of a general law that would accomplish the same end in the cities affected by this law, and in all other cities in like situation. The fact that they are located in a county with a population of not less than two hundred fifty thousand nor more than four hundred thousand cannot possibly account for any difference in situation in respect to the need, of a city treasurer or the propriety of the county treasurer acting as such. ... we are unable to see how the fact that a city of a second class or fourth class happens to be located in a county with a population between two hundred fifty thousand and four hundred thousand can possibly affect the necessity or expediency of its maintaining a city treasurer.” (our emphasis) Heckler v. Conter, supra, 206 Ind. at 382-84, 187 N. E. at 880 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Dortch v. Lugar“In all cases enumerated in the preceding Section, and in all other cases where a general law can be made applicable, all laws shall be general and of uniform operation throughout the state.”
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.