Padgett v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis
1960
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently May 2010
8 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 Darling Apartment Co. v. Springer · State ex rel. Schneider v. Cunningham · Boughton v. Price · Shute v. Frohmiller · Rich v. Williams
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““True, the board of examiners is a constitutional tribunal, with the constitutionally vested power to examine all claims against the state. But, nevertheless, it is also only an arm of the executive department of the state government. The authority now claimed would make it the supreme authority in state government, with power to control or nullify the acts and functions of all three of the major ■departments of the state government —executive, legislative, and judicial. ■Such power, the constitution does not confer upon it. The power to examine ;all claims against the state does not extend that far. Const. Art. 4, § 18, Art. 2, § 1. ****** “We have found no constitutional objection to the act of the legislature in providing the board of highway directors with authority to employ counsel of its choice, yet two of the members of the board of examiners are claiming the power to overrule the legislature and nullify its act, on the ground that the wisdom and policy of the legislature does not accord with the views of the attorney general. “The ground upon which the board denied plaintiff’s claim, not being one upon which it is authorized to base such denial, its action is without force or effect.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Jewett v. Williams““This does not mean, however, that the Board of Examiners is vested with authority by either the Constitution or statute to override the expressed will of the Legislature. By our Constitution the power to make and determine policy for the government of the State is vested in the Legislature, (Citations). “The Legislature having considered and determined the necessity for the building authorized by Chapter 83, and that its construction is in the interest of the people of the State, and having by the enactment of said Chapter approved the project by appropriating funds for its construction, the Board of Examiners is without power to veto the act, or reverse the policy thus declared, by refusing to approve valid claims properly presented, in' execution thereof. As to such claims, the authority of the Board of Examiners is limited to determining that the claims are in proper form, properly certified to the State Auditor by the Department of Highways, and chargeable against the appropriation.” (Emphasis supplied.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Jewett v. Williams“shall perform such duties as are prescribed by this Constitution and as may be prescribed by law”); Padgett v. Williams, 82 Idaho 28, 36 , 348 P.2d 944, 948 (1960) (”
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.