Krantz v. City of Fort Smith’s Empirical Analysis
160 F.3d 1214 · 1998
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently September 2017 · most notably Klein v. City of San Clemente (2009), Gray v. City of Valley Park (2009)
11 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 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
Relies on Ward v. Rock Against Racism · Steffel v. Thompson · Members of the City Council of Los Angeles v. Taxpayers for Vincent · Schneider v. State · Virginia v. American Booksellers Assn., Inc.
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“" '[T]he requirement of narrow tailoring is satisfied so long as the regulation promotes a substantial interest that would be achieved less effectively absent the regulation’ and the means chosen does not 'burden substantially more speech than is necessary to further' the city's content-neutral interest.” Excalibur Group, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis, 116 F.3d 1216, 1221 (8th Cir.1997) (.Excalibur Group) (quoting Ward [v. Rock Against Racism], 491 U.S. [781,] 799, 109 S.Ct. 2746 , 105 L.Ed.2d 661 [(1989)] (internal quotations omitted)), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1077 , 118 S.Ct. 855 , 139 L.Ed.2d 755 (1998). Krantz v. City of Fort Smith, 160 F.3d 1214 , 1219 (8th Cir.1998), cert. denied, 527 U.S. 1037 , 119 S.Ct. 2397 , 144 L.Ed.2d 797 (1999). The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has also stated that “the regulation need not be the least restrictive means of serving the city’s content-neutral interest." Excalibur Group, Inc., 116 F.3d at 1221 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“SECTION 3. It shall be unlawful for any person to place or deposit any commercial or non-commercial handbill or other hand-distributed advertisement upon any vehicle not his own, or in his possession, upon any public street, highway, sidewalk, road, [or] alley within the City of Van Burén, providing, however, that it shall not be unlawful upon any such street or other public place for a person to hand out and distribute to the receiver therefor, any handbill to any occupant of the vehicle that is willing to accept it.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“not narrowly tailored to serve the governmental purpose asserted by defendants.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Donald Sweat Rev
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.