Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 136 F.3d 1219 - Dodd v. Hood River County

Dodd v. Hood River County’s Empirical Analysis

136 F.3d 1219 · 1998

Citation profile

41
cited by 41 later decisions
3
states following
July 2023
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently July 2023 · most notably DLX, Inc. v. Kentucky (2004), Thornton

12 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions

3101998200020102020decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 1738 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Allen v. McCurry · Montana v. United States · Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City · Kremer v. Chemical Construction Corp. · Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council

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

  1. “1. The issue in the two proceedings is identical. 2. The issue was actually litigated and was essential to a final decision on the merits in the prior proceeding. 3. The party sought to be precluded has had a full and fair opportunity to be heard on that issue. 4.' The party sought to be precluded was a party or was in privity with a party to the prior proceeding. 5. The prior proceeding was the type of proceeding to which this court will give preclusive effect.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[t]he Courts of Appeals were not created to be `the Grand Mufti of local zoning boards,' nor do they `sit as super zoning boards or zoning boards of appeals.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the reservation doctrine does not enable them to avoid preclusion of issues actually litigated in the state forum”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.