Blackman v. Stone’s Empirical Analysis
1936
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently April 1951
2 federal appellate · 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 Ex parte Siebold · Nixon v. Herndon · Nixon v. Condon · Giles v. Harris · State ex rel. Workman v. Goldthait
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Defendants have raised a legal question which for convenience sake is stated thus: May. a court of equity grant the relief here sought? * * * “Defendants argue that the question must be answered in the negative because (a) the rights sought to be vindicated and protected are political rather than civil rights, and (b) courts of equity, both state and Federal, have uniformly refused to take jurisdiction of suits to protect or vindicate political rights. “A study of the authorities leaves us in no doubt as to the soundness of the defendants’ second- proposition, viz., that courts of equity do not assume jurisdiction of suits to protect invaded political rights.””
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.