Ahto v. Weaver’s Empirical Analysis
1963
Citation profile
100 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 101 later decisions — most recently December 2014 · most notably Donadio v. Cunningham (1971), Hennessey v. Coastal Eagle Point Oil Co. (1992)
100 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 Baldonado v. California · Reilly v. Ozzard · Bass v. United States · Nolan v. Fitzpatrick · Morss v. Forbes
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 101 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“will not be resolved unless absolutely imperative in the disposition of the litigation.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“may not represent conflicting interests even with consent of all concerned”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Granting that the doctrine is limited to “offices,” the appropriate definition of the term must have regard to the public evil the rule is designed to remedy. See Reilly v. Ozzard, supra [ 33 N.J. at 541 ], While the quoted requisites have been used as a criterion in incompatibility cases, e.g., Wilentz ex rel. Golat v. Stanger, 129 N.J.L. 606 (E. & A.1943), Ozzard indicated they were not exclusive or controlling. Parenthetically, it might be said that section 2 of L.1962, c. 173, in legalizing the holding of an office or position in county or municipal government by a legislator, indicates legislative recognition that the doctrine can apply to a “position” even if rigid categories and nomenclature were to be maintained, [at 429-430]”
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.