Burns v. Peavler’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently May 2011
5 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 BOARD OF ADJUST. OF CITY OF RICHMOND v. Flood · Ashland Lumber Company v. Williams · Thomas v. Barnett · Fiscal Court of Jefferson County v. Don Ridge Land Developing Co.
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An appealing party [is] given thirty (30) days from the date of notice of the determination of the enforcement officer in which to file an appeal with the board of adjustment. KRS 100.261. If the appeal to the board of adjustment [is] unsuccessful, the statutes provide! ] a further appeal to circuit court from final actions of the board. KRS 100.347. Again, the moving party is required to file his action -within thirty (30) days. (Original emphasis.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Taylor v. Duke“As pointed out previously, it is not seriously doubted that the initial position of the enforcement officer was incorrect. In any event, it was incumbent upon Bums to appeal to the Board of Adjustment within SO days from first learning of the [hearing] officer’s decision. (Emphasis supplied.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Taylor v. Duke
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.