Hill School Tax Exemption Case’s Empirical Analysis
1952
Citation profile
113 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 117 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably Hospital Utilization Project v. Commonwealth (1985), 46 Cal. 2d 644 - Lundberg v. County of Alameda (1956)
113 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 Francois Fenelon v. The Mayor Aldermen and Citizens of Philadelphia · Ould v. Washington Hospital for Foundlings · Young Mens Christian Assoc. of Germantown v. Phila. · McConnell v. Williams · Fire Insurance Patrol v. Boyd
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 117 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"The word `charitable', in a legal sense, includes every gift for a general public use, to be applied, consistent with existing laws, for the benefit of an indefinite number of persons, and designed to benefit them from an educational, religious, moral, physical or social standpoint. In its broadest meaning it is understood `to refer to something done or given for the benefit of our fellows or the public.'"”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage“(a) The following property shall be exempt from all connty, borongh, town, township, road, poor, and school tax, to wit: (3) All hospitals, universities, colleges, seminaries, academies, associations and institutions of learning, benevolence or charity, including fire and rescue stations, with the grounds thereto annexed and necessary for the occupancy and enjoyment of the same, founded, endowed and maintained by public or private charity: Provided, That the entire-revenue de rived by the same be applied to the support and to increase the efficiency and facilities thereof, the repair and the necessary increases of grounds and buildings thereof, and for no other purpose.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““ * * * That case (Ogontz) does not rule the present one. There the corporation was not in fact entirely free from private profit motive. The owner sold the school taking back in partial payment mortgages and bonds. A debt of $550,-000 was liquidated from the profits of the school. The school also purchased from its profits a summer camp for $32,000. The tuition charged was sufficient to cover the entire cost of student aid to some of the students, and still leave a substantial profit. The former owner received a salary of $20,000 per year for some years, but which was later reduced to $8,000 a year. She was also given the use of a house and maintenance. Without the review in detail of its financial structure and administration, it will suffice to state that the findings of fact of the court below in that case did not establish that the Ogontz School qualified for the tax exemption claimed as a ‘purely public charity’.””
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.