State v. Heitz’s Empirical Analysis
1951
Citation profile
16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently March 2020
16 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 Hadacheck v. Sebastian · Sproles v. Binford · Mutual Film Corporation v. Industrial Commission of Ohio · Standard Oil Co. v. City of Marysville · Ohio Oil Co. v. Conway
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A legislative body cannot delegate legislative power to make laws to other body or authority, State v. Nelson, 36 Idaho 713 , 213 P. 358 , but this rule does not preclude conferring upon local subdivisions or administrative officers the power to prescribe or vary regulations concerning motor vehicles used on public highways within definite limits fixed by the legislative body.” State v. Heitz, 72 Idaho 107 , 238 P.2d 439, 441 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Mead v. Arnell · Howard v. Missman““A legislature, or other law-making body, in enacting a law complete in itself, designed to accomplish the regulation of particular matters falling with in its jurisdiction may expressly authorize an administrative commission (in this case the Commissioner of Public Works) within definite limits, to provide rules and regulations for the complete operation and enforcement of the law within its expressed general purpose, * *”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Clark · Grayot v. Summers““ ‘It is a fundamental principle of constitutional law that a person can be heard to question the constitutionality of a statute only when and insofar as it is being, or about to be, applied to his disadvantage. Cases cited. It follows “that one may not urge the unconstitutionality of a statute who is not harmfully affected by the particular feature of the statute alleged to be in conflict with the constitution.” ’ Tooz v. State, [76] N.D. [599], 38 N.W.2d 285 , at page 290.” Poffenroth v. Culinary Workers Union Local No. 328, 71 Idaho 412, 414 , 232 P.2d 968, 969 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Wendler
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.