Johnson v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
1932
Citation profile
31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently May 1990 · most notably State Ex Rel. Olsen v. Public Service Commission (1955), Cascade County Consumers Ass'n v. Public Service Commission (1964)
31 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 Hagar v. · Wolfe Londoner v. City and County of Denver · 104 Cal. App. 235 - Hammond Lumber Co. v. County of Los Angeles · Los Angeles Gas & Electric Co. v. County of Los Angeles · Mahoney v. City of San Diego
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““However, a hearing on objections to the assessment of property is necessary in order to constitute due process of law. (3 Cooley on Taxation, [3d Ed.] §§ 1113, 1114; Hagar v. Reclamation District, 111 U.S. 701 , 4 S.Ct. 663 , 28 L.Ed. 569 . And while the hearing may be informal, the taxpayer must' be given an opportunity to produce proof of, and the board must render its honest judgment based upon evidence before it. Where a hearing is a mere form, there is no due process. 3 Cooley, above, § 1116; Londoner v. City and County of Denver, 210 U.S. 373 , 28 S.Ct. 708 , 52 L.Ed. 1103 . A presumption of correct action will give prima facie support to the board’s conclusions, but this presumption is not conclusive in any case. 3 Cooley, above, § 1229.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““[I]n ... challenges [to] the sufficiency of the evidence to warrant the order of the board and, in determining the question thus presented, the court does not substitute its judgment for that of the taxing authorities, but merely determines, as a matter of law, whether or not the evidence presented to the board is sufficient to sustain the order made.” 92 Mont. at 520 , 15 P.2d at 845 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Mere overvaluation of the property, if shown, is not enough to overthrow the order of the board.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.