Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 6 Backes 318 - Stokes v. Jenkins

Stokes v. Jenkins’s Empirical Analysis

1930

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
4
states following
January 2008
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently January 2008

2 federal appellate · 18 state decisions

8019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Fitzgerald v. Merard Holding Co. · Gilbough v. West Side Amusement Co. · Holzbauer v. Ritter

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. “* * * Because of the location of complainants' lot with reference to the violation, the complainants suffer special damage, greater than any other individual member of the public. The situation created by defendant's violation of the ordinance specially affects the complainants personally and must cause depreciation in value of their property. Infliction on the defendant of the penalty prescribed by the ordinance will bring no relief to the complainants and since the municipality has instituted no proceeding against the defendant to enforce this, or any other remedy, I conclude that the complainants are entitled to relief from this court by injunction, to place them in the enjoyment of the benefits, peculiar to themselves and their property, which the zoning ordinance in question conferred on them.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “If, therefore, the restrictions cease to be universal in their application, the theory of equal benefit fails. The benefits which the complainants were to acquire were through rights in the nature of an easement”
    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.