State v. Downs’s Empirical Analysis
1940
Citation profile
17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently September 1965
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 American Bakeries Co. v. City of Opelika · 21 Ala. App. 613 - Nash v. State · 29 Ala. App. 442 - State v. Downs
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.
““It will be noted no separate privilege tax is levied on retailers of lumber. The operation of a lumberyard, bringing in and selling out at retail, is covered by the lumberyard license, based on local demand by reason of location; and retail sales from the sawmill plant, are covered by the sawmill license. Immediately following the ‘lumber yard’ schedule in both the Acts of 1919 and 1935, is the schedule covering the ‘wholesale dealer in lumber.’ ” (Emphasis supplied) 240 Ala. 75 , 197 So. 383 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Hall““Lumberyards. — Each person operating a lumberyard; (here follows certain classifications based on population). This shall not apply to regularly licensed sawmills selling lumber at retail at it or his plant.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Hall
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.