Asbury Hospital v. Cass County’s Empirical Analysis
326 U.S. 207 · 1945
Citation profile
35 federal appellate · 13 district · 104 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 208 later decisions (19 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2005 · most notably Morey v. Doud (1957), Western and Southern Life Insurance Company v. State Board of Equalization of California (1981)
35 federal appellate · 13 district · 104 state decisions — followed in 21 states
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 Carmichael v. Southern Coal & Coke Co. · Alabama State Federation of Labor Local v. McAdory · United States v. Rock Royal Co-Op Noyes · Paul v. Virginia · Hammond Packing Company v. State of Arkansas
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 208 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The due process clause does not guarantee that a foreign corporation when lawfully excluded as such from ownership of land in the state shall recapture its cost. It is enough that the corporation, in complying with the lawful command of the state to part with ownership, is afforded a fair opportunity to realize the value of the land, and that the sale, when required, is to be under conditions reasonably calculated to realize its value at the time of sale. No reason is advanced for saying, and we cannot say that the period of ten years allowed to appellant to dispose of the property, or its sale after ten years at public auction held under direction of the court and comparable generally to a mortgage foreclosure sale, fails to satisfy either of these conditions.” Asbury Hospital v. Cass County, 326 U.S. 207, 212-213 , 66 S.Ct. 61, 64 , 90 L.Ed. 6 (1945).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The legislature is free to make classifications in the application of a statute which are relevant to the legislative purpose. The ultimate test of validity is not whether the classes differ but whether the differences between them are pertinent to the subject with respect to which the classification is made.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Any corporation . . . which . has acquired or hereafter shall acquire any rural real estate, used or usable for farming or agriculture . shall dispose of such real estate, except such as is reasonably necessary in the conduct of its business, within ten years from the date that it was so acquired. During said ten-year period, the- corporation may farm and use such lands for agricultural purposes.” Section 10-06-06, NDCC, provides: “In case any corporation, either domestic or foreign, violates any provision of this chapter or fails, within the time fixed by this chapter, to dispose of any real estate to which it has acquired title and which is not reasonably necessary for the conduct of its business, then title to such real estate shall escheat to the county in which such real estate is situated upon an action instituted by the state’s attorney of such county, and such county shall dispose of the land within one year at public auction to the highest bidder, and the proceeds of such sale, after all expenses of such proceedings shall have been paid, shall be paid to the corporation which formerly owned the land.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.