Pullen v. Ulmer’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently August 2018
16 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 Hughes v. Oklahoma · Toomer v. Witsell · Baldwin v. Fish and Game Comm'n of Mont. · Geer v. State of Connecticut · Guin v. Ha
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“designed to appeal to the self-interests of sport, personal and subsistence fishers”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“set[ting] aside [of] a certain specified amount of money or property for a specific purpose or object in such a manner that is executable, mandatory, and reasonably definite with no further legislative action.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[nlo particular group or person or entity [was] targeted to receive state money or property, nor [was] there any indication that by passing [the] initiative, the voters would be voting themselves money”
2 later decisions 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.