Natale’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
38 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 174 later decisions — most recently April 2023 · most notably 24 Cal. 4th 1003 - Galland v. City of Clovis (2001), Casale v. Kelly (2009)
38 district · 6 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 Mapp v. Ohio · Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp. · County of Sacramento v. Lewis · Rochin v. People of California · Village of Belle Terre v. Boraas
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 174 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Substantive due process is an outer limit on the legitimacy of governmental action. It does not forbid governmental actions that might fairly be deemed arbitrary or capricious and for that reason correctable in a state court lawsuit seeking review of administrative action. Substantive due process standards are violated only by conduct that is so outrageously arbitrary as to constitute a gross abuse of governmental authority.”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[I]f uncertainty as to the law did not preclude recognition of a federally pro-tectable property interest, permit claimants would regularly be entitled to present to federal courts their disputes concerning interpretation of local and state land use regulations. Just as federal courts are not to be turned into zoning boards of appeals, they are also , not to be substituted for state courts as adjudicators of the meaning of zoning and other land use regulations.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Arbitrary conduct that might violate zoning regulations as a matter of state law is not sufficient to demonstrate conduct so outrageously arbitrary as to constitute a gross abuse of governmental authority that will offend the substantive component of the Due Process Clause.”
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.