Codorus Township v. Rodgers’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently June 2005
11 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 Schubach v. Silver · Boundary Drive Associates v. Shrewsbury Township Board of Supervisors · Hopewell Township Board of Supervisors v. Golla · 92 Ill. App. 3d 997 - Wilson v. County of McHenry · 50 Pa. Commw. 249 - Martin v. Township of Millcreek
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The present content of the MPC in Pennsylvania reflects a nationwide legislative trend toward using zoning as one of the tools for the preservation of agricultural land. As noted four years ago in Coughlin and Keene, The Protection of Farm Land: An Analysis of Various State and Local Approaches, 33 LAND USE LAW 7 ZONING DIGEST 5, 6-8 (1981), there were then 270 local (county and municipal) agricultural zoning efforts which the authors had identified. Their survey showed that, in addition to rather simplistic ordinances requiring only a substantial minimum lot size (ranging from as little as ten acres to as much as 640 acres), local legislative patterns employed exclusive agricultural use districts and also area-based allocation ordinances similar to the one before us here which allow owners to build additional dwellings for each unit of land of a specified area that they own. As yet, the volume of precedents is small. In Joyce v. City of Portland, 24 Or. App. 689 , 546 P. 2d 1100 (1976), the Court of Appeals of Oregon held that exclusive farm and forest use zoning did not constitute an unconstitutional taking. More to the point, Gisler v. County of Madera, 38 Cal. App. 3d 303 , 112 Cal. Rptr. 919 (1974), upheld the validity of an ordinance providing for exclusive agricultural zoning with a minimum eighteen-acre parcel size. The most recent decision on point, nationally speaking, is Wilson v. County of McHenry, 92 Ill. App. 3d 997 , 48 Ill.Dec. 395 , 416 N.E. 2d 426 (1981)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[W]e emphasize that a fifty-acre lot area minimum is not necessarily valid in every situation, whether required for agricultural preservation purposes or otherwise, but must be scrutinized, as here, under a substantive due process analysis in the context in which it is presented.”
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.