McDonald v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
February 2002
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 201 (Bank Bribery Amendments)
Relies on Herrera v. Collins · Clinton v. Jones · United States v. George Wilson · Ruiz v. Hull · Marriage of Gutierrez v. Gutierrez
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“question is not whether the [official] acted properly ... or whether the [official] did its duty in considering the matter, but whether the [official] acted at all. In the case at bar, the evidence as to whether the [official] did consider and act is readily available to the [official], while proof that they did not is practically impossible for the petitioner to show. We feel the presumption should be that the [official] did not act absent something in the file showing that the [official] did, in fact, consider the matter and act accordingly____”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McDonald v. Thomas
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.