Dike v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1888
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently August 2008
10 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.
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In short, the legislature, instead of investigating the facts themselves, and then appropriating the money absolutely, referred the investigation to the district court, and appropriated the money to-pay the claims, conditioned upon the court’s finding that they were of the character and description provided for in the fourth section of the act of 1881. Had the legislature adopted the first course, it. seems to us that no one would have questioned the constitutionality of the act; but there is no difference in principle between that case and this. The appropriation of money to pay these claims, whether conditionally or unconditionally, amd whether as a gift or in settlement of an obligation, moral or legal, was not the grant of a ‘privilege’ within the meaning of the constitution. The language of the- constitution was never intended to apply to such a case. If it did, the legislature could never appropriate money to pay a particular claim without passing a general law paying every other claim. The object of the constitutional amendment was to prohibit special or private legislation on certain subjects, which could be provided for by general laws. This is clearly indicated by the second section, which makes it the duty of the legislature to provide general laws for the transaction of any business that may be prohibited by section 1, which laws are to be uniform in their operation throughout the state. That the appropriation of moneys out of the state treasury could not he prov”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. White v. State“a right or immunity granted to a person either against or beyond the course of the common or general law.”
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.