Nash v. Blunt’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Trbovich v. United Mine Workers · Davis v. Bandemer · United States Postal Service v. Brennan · Spangler v. Pasadena City Board of Education · Sanguine, Ltd. v. United States Department of the Interior
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In addition to being necessary as a check on the possible intrusion of partisan interests into these legal matters, the grants of intervention were necessary to insure this court's jurisdiction. In arriving at the proposed settlement, the parties necessarily agreed on a wide variety of factual and legal issues; for instance, the parties agreed that the proposed settlement does not violate the Constitution or the Voting Rights Act and that the court's adoption of the settlement was the best solution to this entire lawsuit. This court was (and, to some extent, is still) concerned that the parties might actually agree on many of the central issues involved in this case, thereby depriving the court of `opposing parties representing adverse interests' as required by Article III. Financial Guar. Ins. v. City of Fayetteville, 943 F.2d 925 , 929 (8th Cir.1991). By allowing the intervenors to participate in this case, we have insured that opposing viewpoints will continue to be presented to the court.3 "3Even if the parties' agreement on certain issues did not implicate Article III concerns, we would still grant the motions to intervene because the intervenors' presence will aid the court in resolving the issues presented in this case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“it is normal practice in reapportionment controversies to allow intervention of voters ... supporting a position that could theoretically be adequately represented by public officials.”
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.