Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 65 ALA 142 - State Auditor v. Jackson County

State Auditor v. Jackson County’s Empirical Analysis

1880

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
8
states following
December 2015
most recently cited

2 district · 26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently December 2015 · most notably Dearborn v. Johnson (1937), State Ex Rel. Chilton County v. Butler (1932)

2 district · 26 state decisions

7018801890190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 State Railroad Tax Cases Taylor Collector et al. v. Secor et al. · French v. Edwards · Perry County v. Selma, Marion & Memphis Railroad · Thomas v. Gain · Lehman v. Robinson

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

  1. ““In considering the various statutes regulating the assessment of taxes and the measures preliminary thereto, it is not always easy to distinguish which are conditions precedent to the legality and validity of the tax, and which are directory merely and do not constitute conditions. One rule is very plain and well settled, that all those measures which are intended for the security of the citizen, for ensuring an equality of taxation, and to enable every one to Irtow, with reasonable certainty, for what polls and for what real and personal estate he is taxed, nnd for what all those who are liable with him are taxed, are conditions precedent, and if they are not observed he is not legally taxed, and he may resist it in any of the modes authorized by law for contesting the validity of the tax. But many regulations are made by statute, designed for the information of assessors and officers, and intended to promote method, system and uniformity in the modes of proceeding, the compliance or non-compliance with which does in no respect affect the rights of tax-paying citizens. These may be considered directory; officers may be liable to legal animadversion, perhaps to punishment, for not observing them ; but yet their observance is not a condition precedent to the validity of the tax.””
    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.