Swanson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
7 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1341 · 4 U.S.C. § 111
Relies on Honig v. Doe · Harper v. Virginia Department of Taxation · Davis v. Michigan Department of the Treasury · Bob Jones University v. Simon · James B. Beam Distilling Co. v. Georgia
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.
“a party must show that a previous suit has resulted in a final judgment on the merits, that the same cause of action is involved, and that [the current plaintiffs and defendants] were either parties or stand in privity with parties”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Lawson v. Dixon · Lawson v. Dixon“If upon the trial it is determined that all or part of the tax was levied or assessed for an illegal or unauthorized purpose,... judgment shall be rendered therefor, with interest, and the judgment shall be collected as in other cases. The amount of taxes for which judgment is rendered in such an action shall be refunded by the State.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Bailey v. State“[w]e are convinced this procedure comports with due process under the United States Supreme Court's jurisprudence on the subject as it relates to taxation. That Court has long held that postdeprivation remedies in the area of taxation can comport with due process.”
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.