Hubenthal v. Crain’s Empirical Analysis
1959
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently July 2012
14 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 Lipes v. Hand · Zigler v. Menges · Murray v. Gault · Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. Mumford · Sharp v. Eaton
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ Tn determining whether lands are benefited, special benefits only may be considered, and not the general benefits which accrue to the landowner as a member of the community. Benefits are special when they increase the value of the property, relieve it from a burden, or make it especially adapted to a purpose which enhances its value. “ ‘. . . it is not necessary that the benefits be direct and immediate to justify an assessment. Future possibilities, if any, as well as collateral or indirect benefits, may be considered.’ 10 I.L.E., Ditches and Drains, pp. 503, 504. Cleveland, C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Mumford (1935), 208 Ind. 655 , 197 N.E. 826 ; Watson v. Armstrong (1913), 180 Ind. 49 , 102 N.E. 273 ; * *”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“In this case the assessment per acre was arrived at initially by the surveyor and viewers and finally by the court by first estimating the cost of an arbitrary segment of ditch which laid within a watershed area and then dividing the number of acres in the watershed area into said estimated cost. The extent to which the particular land would or would not be benefited as compared with other land in the area was not considered in establishing the particular assessment.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“consider the fact that the owners of the higher land have a right to the natural drainage of their land and that the owners of the low lands must assume this burden different from their better situated neighbors.”
2 later decisions 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.