Brock v. Hall County’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently January 2018
17 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 Cross v. Hall County · Brook Forest Enterprises, Inc. v. Paulding County · 101 Ga. App. 163 - Victoria Corp. v. Atlanta Merchandise Mart, Inc. · Riverhill Community Ass'n v. Cobb County Board of Commissioners · Aiken v. Armistead
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Although there is a distinct difference between the zoning authority (city or county governing authority) and a zoning board of adjustment, they are related in that they both deal with aspects of zoning, and we adopt for use in zoning cases the ‘substantial interest-aggrieved citizen’ test prescribed by the General Assembly as the requirement for standing to appeal board of adjustment decisions. See [citations omitted] Code Ann. § 69-827. “Thus the test of standing in rezoning suits is similar to the special damages standing test as to public nuisances. See Code Ann. §§ 72-103, 72-202.””
2 later decisions 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.