State v. Christopher’s Empirical Analysis
1969
Citation profile
17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently May 2009
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 Burnquist v. Cook · HOUSING & REDEVEL. AUTHOR. OF MINNEAPOLIS v. Mpls. Metropolitan Co. · Minneapolis & St. Louis Railroad v. Village of Hartland · Montour v. Purdy · The Kelmar Corp. v. District Court
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.
“[N]ot all condemnors in the hierarchy of entities having the power of eminent domain enjoy the same rights and powers. The powers of the state are preeminent because of the state’s sovereign authority. It is not correct to equate the sovereign right of the state to condemn land for a public purpose with rights of lesser subdivisions of the government ... to exercise the right of eminent domain.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Silver v. Ridgeway
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.