Cohen v. Ennis’s Empirical Analysis
1958
Citation profile
19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently January 2016
19 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 Wood v. Wagner Electric Corporation · Albert J. Hoppe, Inc. v. St. Louis Public Service Co. · Scott v. Wheelock Bros., Inc. · State Ex Rel. Police Retirement System v. Murphy · Veal v. Leimkuehler
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“536.100. Party aggrieved entitled to judicial review. — Any person who has exhausted all administrative remedies provided by law and who is aggrieved by a final decision in a contested case, whether such decision is affirmative or negative in form, shall be entitled to judicial review thereof, as provided in sections 536.100 to 536.140, unless some other provision for judicial review is provided by statute; provided, however, that nothing in this chapter contained shall prevent any person from attacking any void order of an agency at any time or in any manner that would be proper in the absence of this section. Unreasonable delay on the part of any agency in deciding any contested case shall be grounds for an order of the court either compelling action by the agency or removing the case to the court for decision.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Any person ... aggrieved by any decision of the board of adjustment ... may present to the circuit court ... a petition, duly verified, setting forth' that such decision is illegal, in whole or in part, specifying the grounds of the illegality.... Upon the presentation of such petition the court may allow a writ of certiorari directed' to the board of adjustment to review such decision ...1 and- shall prescribe therein the time within which ’ a return thereto must be made.... [The court] may take additional evidence ... [and] may reverse or affirm, wholly or partly, or may modify» the decision brought up for review. - •”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Section 89.110, RSMo 1986, reads in part: Any person or persons jointly or severally aggrieved by any decision of the board of adjustment, or any officer, department, board or bureau of the municipality, may present to the circuit court of the county or city in which the property affected is located a petition, duly verified, setting forth that such decision is illegal, in whole or in part, specifying the grounds of the illegality. Such petition shall be presented to the court within thirty days after the filing of the decision in the office of the board. (Emphasis added).”
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.