Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 95 Nev. 723 - Cirac v. Lander County

Cirac v. Lander County’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

68
cited by 68 later decisions
2
states following
March 2016
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 66 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 68 later decisions — most recently March 2016 · most notably Miller v. Burk (2008), Maxwell v. State Industrial Insurance System (1993)

2 federal appellate · 66 state decisions

30019791980199020002010decided

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 Dunn v. Blumstein · Kramer v. Union Free School District No. 15 · Moore v. Ogilvie · Hill v. Stone · In Re Estate of Pepper

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 68 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “1. At the time specified in the notice; the board of county commissioners shall meet and inquire into and determine the sufficiency of the petition [for removal of a county seat] and the validity of the signatures thereto, and if sufficient and signed by the required number the board shall make an order directing that the proposition to remove the county seat to the place named in the petition be submitted to a vote of the qualified electors of the county at the next general election, if the same is to occur within 6 months of the time of filing the petition; otherwise at a special election to be called for that purpose at any time not less than 4 months nor more than 6 months from the date of filing the petition with the clerk of the board.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “signed by qualified electors of the county, who are also taxpayers of the county as appears by the last real or personal property assessment roll, equal in number to at least 60 percent of the legal votes cast at the last preceding general election in the county”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “add to or alter [the language] to accomplish a purpose not on the face of the statute or apparent from permissible extrinsic aids such as legislative history or committee reports.”
    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.