Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 575 P2D 306 - Cremer v. Anchorage

Cremer v. Anchorage’s Empirical Analysis

1978

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
2
states following
June 2015
most recently cited

6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently June 2015

6 state decisions

3019781980199020002010decided

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 Wernberg v. Matanuska Electric Association · Jefferson v. State · Adkins v. Lester · Area Dispatch, Inc. v. City of Anchorage · Adkins v. Lester

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

  1. “the ordinance ... directly or indirectly impede[s] implementation of a [state law] which [seeks] to further a specific statewide policy.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. Simpson v. Municipality of Anchorage · State v. Hamilton
  2. “In Adkins , there was an apparent inconsistency between the ordinance and the state regulation — something which does not exist in this case. It can hardly be said here that by prohibiting the driving on public highways by one whose license has been suspended, the legislature intended, as a matter of policy, to permit such a person to drive on privately owned-property, such as the large parking lot involved in this case.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. Simpson v. Municipality of Anchorage
  3. “an essential criterion of inconsistency under 28.01.010(a) is whether the [local] ordinance in question seeks to proscribe conduct which ... the [state] legislature intended, as a matter of policy, to permit.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. State v. Hamilton

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.