Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 239 N.C. 274 - State v. Towery

State v. Towery’s Empirical Analysis

1954

Citation profile

35
cited by 35 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
6
states following
February 1974
most recently cited

2 district · 29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 35 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 1974 · most notably McGowan v. State of Maryland Gallagher (1961), Giant of Maryland, Inc. v. State's Attorney (1973)

2 district · 29 state decisions

140195419601970decided

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 Magoun v. Illinois Trust & Savings Bank · Atchison Co v. Matthews · City of Springfield v. Smith · State v. Trantham · City of Mt. Vernon v. Julian

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

  1. “"Legislative bodies may distinguish, select, and classify objects of legislation. It suffices if the classification is practical. (Citations omitted.) They may prescribe different regulations for different classes, and discrimination as between classes is not such as to invalidate the legislative enactment."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““It would seem that the reasoning of the Illinois Court ignores the right of a municipality in adopting a Sunday closing ordinance to discriminate as between classes, State v. Trantham, 230 N.C. 641 , 55 S.E.2d 198 , but instead makes the question of competition or the right generally to conduct a business the determinative factor.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The one requirement is that the ordinance must affect all persons similarly situated or engaged in the same business without discrimination.”
    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.