Fenton v. Howard’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently February 2024 · most notably Hurles v. Ryan (2014), Bain v. SUPER. CT. IN AND FOR MARICOPA CTY. (1986)
6 federal appellate · 26 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.
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We hold that a judge does have the right to appear and to be represented in a special action against him, where the judge is a named respondent____ In the instant case, the right of the judge to appear and to be represented is especial ly important because the judge named as respondent is the head of the Conciliation Court, and he is therefore vitally concerned with the outcome of the Special Action. It is the judge’s prerogative to appear and argue for a result which would not hamper the effective functioning of the Conciliation Court.”
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.