Embry v. O'BANNON’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

21 state decisions

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

1. “Significantly, the majority opinion in Pence did not expressly discuss the pub-lie standing doctrine, but observed: While the availability of taxpayer or citizen standing may not be foreclosed in extreme circumstances, it is clear that such status will rarely be sufficient. For a private individual to invoke the exercise of judicial power, such person must ordinarily show that some direct injury has or will immediately be sustained. Id. ... This language clearly does not abrogate but rather acknowledges the public standing doctrine. We view application of the standing rule in Pence merely to express our exercise of judicial discretion with cautious restraint under the cireumstances. We hold that Pence did not alter the public standing doctrine in Indiana. The public standing doctrine, which applies in cases where public rather than private rights are at issue and in cases which involve the enforcement of a pub-lie rather than a private right, continues to be a viable exception to the general standing requirement. The public standing doctrine permits the assertion of all proper legal challenges, including claims that government action is unconstitutional. However, persons availing themselves of the public standing doctrine nevertheless remain subject to various limitations. Similarly, although the Indiana Declaratory Judgment Act expressly authorizes Indiana courts to "declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed," Ind.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Liberty Landowners Ass'n v. Porter County Commissioners

2. “a search for the common understanding of both those who framed it and those who ratified it. Furthei’more, the intent of the framers of the Constitution is paramount in determining the meaning of a provision. In order to give life to their intended meaning, we examine the language of the text in the context of the history surrounding its drafting and ratification, the purpose and structure of our constitution, and case law interpreting the specific provisions. In construing the constitution, we look to the history of the times, and examine the state of things existing when the constitution or any part thereof was framed and adopted, to ascertain the old law, the mischief, and the remedy. The language of each provision of the Constitution must be treated with particular deference, as though every word had been hammered into place.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Meredith v. Pence

3. “Indiana cases recognize certain situations in which public rather than private rights are at issue and hold that the usual standards for establishing standing need not be met. This Court held in those cases that when a case involves enforcement of a public rather than a private right the plaintiff need not have a special interest in the matter nor be a public official. Specifically, the public standing doctrine eliminates the requirement that the relator have an interest in the outcome of the litigation different from that of the general public.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State Ex Rel. Steinke v. Coriden