Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 249 Ga. 400 - Fowler v. Mitcham

Fowler v. Mitcham’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
3
states following
May 2018
most recently cited

11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently May 2018

11 state decisions

701982199020002010decided

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 Wood v. State · 76 Ga. App. 612 - Burke v. State · Payne v. State · Parrish v. Town of Adel · Truesdel v. Freeney

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

  1. “This is analogous to the effect of [OCGA § 16-10-9], which enforces the separation-of-powers provision of our State Constitution as to state offices. See Galer v. Board of Regents, [supra]. If permitted to serve in their dual capacities as aldermen (legislative) and policemen (executive), the appellants could not only vote to set their own salaries, but also enforce ordinances which they had participated in enacting.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Consistently with the common-law rule against conflicts of interest in local government, our courts have held that it is contrary to public policy to permit an official board having the power to appoint to an office to exercise that power by appointing one or more of their own body, unless the statute conferring the appointing power expressly authorizes self-appointment.”
    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.