Plyler v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

40 federal appellate · 10 district · 4 state decisions

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

1. “(2) Immediate termination of prospective relief. — In any civil action with respect to prison conditions, a defendant or intervener shall be entitled to the immediate termination of any prospective relief if the relief was approved or granted in the absence of a finding by the court that the relief is narrowly drawn, extends no further than necessary to correct the violation of the Federal right, and is the least intrusive means necessary to correct the violation of the Federal right. -(3) Limitation. — Prospective relief shall not terminate if the court makes written findings based on the record that prospective relief remains necessary to correct a current or ongoing violation of the Federal right, extends no further than necessary to correct the violation of the Federal right, and that the prospective relief is narrowly drawn and the least intrusive means to correct the violation.”

   9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Benjamin v. Jacobson · Cagle v. Hutto

2. “At the time the judgment was rendered in the circuit court of the City of Norfolk the act of 1882 was in force, and the judgment was rightfully entered under the authority of that act. The writ of error to the court of appeals of the state brought the validity of that judgment into review, and the question presented to the court was whether, at the time it was rendered, it was rightful or not. If rightful, the plaintiff therein had a vested right, which no state legislation could disturb. It is not within the power of a legislature to take away rights which have been once, vested by a judgment. Legislation may act on subsequent proceedings, may abate actions pending, but when those actions have passed into judgment the power of the legislature to disturb rights created thereby ceases.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Michael Patrick Gavin, in His Own Behalf and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated Ed Clark, in His Own Behalf and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Terry Branstad Charles Palmer Walter Kautzky Herb Maschner John Emmett Larry Moline Charles Naugling Steven Korb Mike Foehring John Fullenkamp Eldon Degrange Fred Cole Ron Meyers Charles Free Randy Martin, United States of America, Intervenor Michael Patrick Gavin, in His Own Behalf and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated Ed Clark, in His Own Behalf and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Terry Branstad Charles Palmer Walter Kautzky Herb Maschner John Emmett Larry Moline Charles Naugling Steven Korb Mike Foehring John Fullenkamp Eldon Degrange Fred Cole Ron Meyers Charles Free Randy Martin, United States of America, Intervenor · 978 F. Supp. 221 - Luxford v. Dalkon Shield Trust

3. “accorded a strong presumption of validity and must be upheld against an equal protection challenge if there is any reasonably conceivable state of facts that could provide a rational basis for the classification.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. HCMF Corp. v. Allen · 141 F. Supp. 2d 611 - Buerer v. United States