Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 236 Va. 136 - Benderson Development Co. v. Sciortino

Benderson Development Co. v. Sciortino’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
2
states following
April 2006
most recently cited

30 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently April 2006 · most notably Etheridge v. Medical Center Hospitals (1989), Pulliam v. Coastal Emergency Services of Richmond, Inc. (1999)

30 state decisions

160198819902000decided

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 McGowan v. State of Maryland Gallagher · City of New Orleans v. Dukes · Whalen v. Roe · Ferguson v. Skrupa · Lehnhausen v. Lake Shore Auto Parts Co.

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

  1. ““In all cases enumerated in the preceding section, . . . the General Assembly shall enact general laws. Any general law shall be subject to amendment or repeal, but the amendment or partial repeal thereof shall not operate directly or indirectly to enact, and shall not have the effect of enactment of, a special, private, or local law. “No private corporation, association, or individual shall be specially exempted from the operation of any general law, nor shall a general law’s operation be suspended for the benefit of any private corporation, association, or individual.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[Ujnder the Equal Protection clause, both state and federal courts will uphold state laws which make economic classifications “unless ‘the classification rests on grounds wholly irrelevant to the achievement of the State’s objective’ ” [citation omitted], or unless the law “is so unrelated to the achievement of a legitimate purpose that it appears irrational” [citation omitted]. On the other hand, the test for statutes challenged under the special-laws prohibitions ... is that they must bear “a reasonable and substantial relation to the object sought to be accomplished by the legislation.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Because the power of judicial review is the only protection which exists against legislation which has become unconstitutional as applied, our role is not limited to examining the effect of legislative amendments. When the application of a law is fairly challenged under the Constitution, it is our duty to examine its actual effect upon those subject to it, regardless of the origin of the factors which combine to produce that effect.”
    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.