Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 81 N.M. 481 - Reed v. Jones

Reed v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis

1970

Citation profile

38
cited by 38 later decisions
1
states following
October 2007
most recently cited

38 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently October 2007 · most notably Security Escrow Corp. v. State of Taxation & Revenue Department (1988), Anaconda Co. v. Property Tax Department (1979)

38 state decisions

2401970198019902000decided

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 Flaska v. State · Winston v. New Mexico State Police Board · Hoge v. Railroad Co. · State v. Shop Rite Foods, Inc. · Peisker v. Unemployment Compensation Commission

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

  1. ““ * * * But though this power is recognized it is accompanied with the qualification that the intention of the legislature to grant the immunity must be clear beyond a reasonable doubt. It cannot be inferred from uncertain phrases or ambiguous terms. The power of taxation is an attribute of sovereignty, and is essential to every independent government. Stripped of this power, it must perish. Whoever, therefore, claims its surrender must show it in language which will admit of no other reasonable construction. If a doubt arises as to the intent of the legislature, it must be solved in favor of the State.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The burden is on the taxpayer to establish clearly his right to the deduction and the intention to authorize the deduction claimed by the taxpayer must be clearly and unambiguously expressed in the statute. (citations omitted).”
    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.