64 Wis. 2d 6 - Omernik v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
155 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 163 later decisions — most recently July 2005 · most notably 90 Wis. 2d 823 - Stanhope v. Brown County (1979), Aicher Ex Rel. LaBarge v. Wisconsin Patients Compensation Fund (2000)
155 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 McGowan v. State of Maryland Gallagher · Lindsley v. Natural Carbonic Gas Co. · United States v. Sullivan · 58 Wis. 2d 32 - State Ex Rel. Hammermill Paper Co. v. La Plante · 56 Wis. 2d 7 - Just v. Marinette County
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 163 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A legislative classification is presumed to be valid. The burden of proof is upon the challenging party to establish the invalidity of a statutory classification. Any reasonable basis for the classification will validate the statute. Equal protection of the law is denied only where the legislature has made irrational or arbitrary classification. . . . The basic test is not whether some inequality results from the classification, but whether there exists any reasonable basis to justify the classification. “Judicial response to a challenged legislative classification requires only that the reviewing court locate some reasonable basis for the classification made. The public policy involved is for the legislature, not the courts, to determine. . . .””
21 later decisions quote this exact passage“"[I]t is not required that all ills or ailments be cured or their cure attempted in a single piece of legislation.... We hold the legislative classification here to have a reasonable basis, repeating that, within the limits of what is reasonable,'... it is for the legislature and not for the court to determine the exact point at which a classification is to operate.’” Id. (quoting State ex rel. Harvey v. Morgan, 30 Wis. 2d 1, 9 , 139 N.W.2d 585 (1966)).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““ Given _ the public interest in preventing the uncontrolled diversion and consumption of stream waters, we do not find any balancing merit to defendant’s contention that he may do as he wishes, not only with his property but with the water of the stream that flows through his land.” .”
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.