The John Corporation’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently October 2023 · most notably Mangiafico v. Town of Farmington (2019), City of New Braunfels, Texas v. Carowest Land, Ltd. (2014)
1 federal appellate · 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 Graham v. Connor · Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment · Daniels v. Williams · City of Cleburne Texas v. Cleburne Living Center · Bell v. Hood
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[wjhile the typical taking occurs when the government acts to condemn property in the exercise of its power of eminent domain, the entire doctrine of inverse condemnation is predicated on the proposition that a taking may occur without such formal proceedings.” First English Evangelical Lutheran Church v. County of Los Angeles, 482 U.S. 304, 316 , 107 S.Ct. 2378 , 96 L.Ed.2d 250 (1987); see also John Corp. v. City of Houston, 214 F.3d 573, 578-79 (5th Cir.2000) (”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Since Williamson County was decided, courts have applied these principles to not only substantive due process claims, but also to procedural due process and equal protection claims. In most cases, however, only Williamson County 's finality requirement has been applied to claims other than the 'due process takings' claim described in that case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.