Roe v. Anderson’s Empirical Analysis
134 F.3d 1400 · 1998
Citation profile
36 federal appellate · 3 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 70 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2018 · most notably Rita Saenz Director California Department of Social Servicess v. Brenda Roe Anna Doe (1999), Bay Area Addiction Research & Treatment, Inc. v. City of Antioch (1999)
36 federal appellate · 3 district · 5 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
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 601 (§ 401 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 604 (§ 404 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp. · Koon v. United States · Shapiro v. Thompson · Schlup v. Delo · Zobel v. Williams
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 70 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) a combination of probable success on the merits and the possibility of irreparable injury or (2) that serious questions are raised and the balance of hardships .tips in its favor. These two formulations represent two points on a sliding scale in which the required degree of irreparable harm increases as the probability of success decreases.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“that discretion is abused where the district court based its ruling on an erroneous view of the law or on a clearly erroneous assessment of the evidence.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[I]n August 1996, Congress enacted a new federal welfare law, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (`PRWORA'), 42 U.S.C. §§ 601 , et seq.,.... The PRWORA superceded the AFDC program with a new program entitled Temporary Assistance of Need[y] Families (`TANF') that significantly increased the states' discretion to design their federally supported welfare plans....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.