183 W. Va. 393 - Neely v. Mangum’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently October 2017
1 federal appellate · 15 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 Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle · Connick v. Myers · Elrod v. Burns · Branti v. Finkel · Rutan v. Republican Party of Illinois
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he constitutionality of dismissing public employees for partisan reasons was first addressed in Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347 [ 96 S.Ct. 2673 , 49 L.Ed.2d 547 ] (1976), a case in which Republican non-civil service Sheriff's office employees were discharged when a Democratic sheriff was elected. The United States Supreme Court ruled that `the practice of patronage dismissals is unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments....' Id. at 373 , 96 S.Ct. at 2689 . There is one exception to the Elrod ruling against patronage dismissals. In the interest of promoting `government efficiency and effectiveness' and implementing policies sanctioned by the electorate, an elected official is permitted to discharge those individuals in policymaking positions. 427 U.S. at 372 , 96 S.Ct. at 2689 . This exception was narrowed in Branti v. Finkel, 445 U.S. 507 , 100 S.Ct. 1287 , 63 L.Ed.2d 574 (1980), where the Supreme Court explained that the `ultimate inquiry is not whether the label "policymaker" or "confidential" fits a particular position; rather the question is whether the hiring authority can demonstrate that party affiliation is an appropriate requirement for the effective performance of the public office involved.' 445 U.S. at 518 , 100 S.Ct. at 1295 . A further narrowing of the policymaker exception may have been made in Rutan v. Republican Party of Illinois, [497] U.S. [62], 110 S.Ct. 2729 , 111 L.Ed.2d 52 (1990) where the Supreme Court appears to suggest that only `hig”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.