Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 892 A.2d 48 - DeGeorge v. Young

DeGeorge v. Young’s Empirical Analysis

2006

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
June 2018
most recently cited

4 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Genkinger v. New Castle · In re Kalinkos · Oberneder v. Link Computer Corp. · Loushay Appeal · Loushay Appeal

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.

  1. “county officers and their dependents shall be eligible for inclusion”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Because Section 1556 does not bestow unlimited discretion on Commissioners to determine to whom they wish to provide full-time health benefits and, because this type of statute must be strictly construed so as not to conflict with the public interest, we hold that Commissioners cannot treat similarly situated County officers differently than they treat themselves and others. (Emphasis added).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[A]s long as those benefits are offered generally to county employees, they can be offered to [c]ounty officers.”
    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.