Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 40 DEL 136 - State v. Danberg

State v. Danberg’s Empirical Analysis

1939

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
5
states following
March 1987
most recently cited

2 district · 18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently March 1987

2 district · 18 state decisions

80193919401950196019701980decided

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 Mugler v. State of Kansas State of Kansas Tufts · Lawton v. Steele · Adkins v. Children's Hospital of the District of Columbia Same · Chas. Wolff Packing Co. v. Court of Industrial Relations · Minnesota v. Barber

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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““To justify the state in interposing its authority in behalf of the public, it must appear that the interests of the public, as distinguished from those of a particular class, demand such interference; that the means employed are reasonably necessary for the accomplishment of the purpose; and that they are not unduly oppressive on individuals. The Legislature may not, under the guise of protecting the public interest, arbitrarily interfere with private business, or impose unusual and unnecessary restrictions upon lawful occupations; nor is the determination by the Legislature as to what is a proper exercise of its police power final and conclusive, but is subject to supervision by the courts. [Citations omitted.] If, then, the means employed are arbitrary and unreasonable, and beyond the necessities of the case, the courts will disregard mere forms, and will interfere for the protection of rights injuriously affected by such illegal action [Citation omitted] for they may ■ and should look at the substance of things whenever they enter upon the inquiry whether the Legislature has transcended the limits of its authority.” (Emphasis added.)”
    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.