Rienhardt v. Kelly’s Empirical Analysis
164 F.3d 1296 · 1999
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 16 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 57 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2022 · most notably Marshall v. Marshall (2006), United States v. City of Las Cruces (2002)
18 federal appellate · 16 district · 3 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 Younger v. Harris · Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp. · Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States · Quackenbush California Insurance Commissioner v. Allstate Insurance Co · Pennzoil Company v. Texaco 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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Under the Younger abstention doctrine, federal courts should not 'interfere with state court proceedings by granting equitable relief such as injunctions of important state proceedings or declaratory judgments regarding constitutional issues in those proceedings ' when a state forum provides an adequate avenue for relief.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It should be 'rarely . . . invoked, because the federal courts have a virtually unflagging obligation . . . to exercise the jurisdiction given them.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Although this case falls within none of the abstention categories, there are principles unrelated to considerations of proper constitutional adjudication and regard for federal-state relations which govern in situations involving the con temporaneous exercise of concurrent jurisdictions, either by federal courts or by state and federal courts. These principles rest on considerations of “(w)ise judicial administration, giving regard to conservation of judicial resources and comprehensive disposition of litigation.””
1 later decision 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.