Hamilton v. State ex rel. Bates’s Empirical Analysis
1852
Citation profile
31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently June 2019 · most notably Union Pacific Railroad Company v. Hall et al. (1875), Rushville Gas Co. v. City of Rushville (1889)
31 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 People ex rel. Case v. Collins · Downing v. Rugar · People v. Mayor of New-York · Harrison v. Stipp
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.
“Were this a case merely for private relief, the relator would have to show some special interest in the subject-matter. But here the case is different. The defendant, who was County Auditor, refused to issue the legal duplicate for the collection of the taxes, and a mandamus was applied for to compel him to discharge this duty of his office. It is a case for the enforcement, not of a private, but of a public right; and it is not necessary, in such cases, that the relator should have a special interest in the matter, or that he should be a public officer. That the defendant should discharge, correctly, the duties of his office, was a matter in which Bates, as a citizen of the county, had a general interest; and that interest was, of itself, sufficient to enable him to obtain the mandamus in question, and have his name inserted as the relator.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“. . The state board [state board of equalization], like the county and district boards, is a mere creature of the statute, and can exercise no authority but such as the statute confers. . . .””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Roberts
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.