Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 152 F.3d 240 - Larsen v. Senate of Pennsylvania

Larsen v. Senate of Pennsylvania’s Empirical Analysis

152 F.3d 240 · 1998

Citation profile

51
cited by 51 later decisions
January 2025
most recently cited

21 federal appellate · 3 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently January 2025 · most notably Geoff Gallas, v. the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania (2000), State Employees Bargaining Agent Coalition v. Rowland (2007)

21 federal appellate · 3 district ·

3401998200020102020decided

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

Relies on Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Mitchell v. Forsyth · Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment · Baker v. Carr · Imbler v. Pachtman

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

  1. “[B]ecause concerns for the separation of powers are often at a minimum at the municipal level, we decline to extend our analysis developed for municipalities to other levels of government.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “in fact the Supreme Court in Consumers Union did resolve the issue of the application of absolute legislative immunity to claims for prospective relief and answered that question in the affirmative.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “A court that is without proper jurisdiction cannot proceed at all, and must merely note the jurisdictional defect and dismiss the suit.”
    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.