In Re Senate Bill No. 95 of the Forty-Third General Assembly

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• dismissing the “thin veneer of language used to ‘get around’ the constitutional prohibition, and to give the measure a mask of general application”
• striking down the “Glendale Bill,” that by its terms did and could apply only to the city of Glendale
• noting that the legislation at issue contained a date on which it would be repealed and therefore, once it had accomplished the particular purpose for which it was adopted, it \would die before it could possibly accomplish a like purpose in any other place\
• \Once having accomplished [its] particular purpose the act would die before it could possibly accomplish a like purpose in any other place.\
• “Once having accomplished [its] particular purpose the act would die before it could possibly accomplish a like purpose in any other place.”
• a bill authorizing annexation of a town by a city under circumstances unique to one location and providing for automatic repeal of annexation authority shortly after enactment was unconstitutional as special legislation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).