Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 216 F.2d 583 - James Francis v. Arthur T. Lyman

James Francis v. Arthur T. Lyman’s Empirical Analysis

216 F.2d 583 · 1954

Citation profile

98
cited by 98 later decisions
1
states following
February 2016
most recently cited

59 federal appellate · 13 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 98 later decisions — most recently February 2016 · most notably Hoffman v. Halden (1959), William J. Bauers, Jr. v. Herbert T. Heisel, Jr (1966)

59 federal appellate · 13 district · 1 state decisions

3701954196019701980199020002010decided

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

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Tenney v. Brandhove · Snowden v. Hughes · Stefanelli v. Minard · Lane v. Wilson · Louis Weber v. United States

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 98 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “* * * fit the statute as harmoniously as may be into the familiar and generally accepted legal background, and to confine its application, within reason, to those situations which might possibly have had the approval of the Congress if it had specifically adverted to the particular cases, bearing in mind the basic purposes which gave rise to the legislation in the first place. Id.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress.””
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “appalling inflammation of delicate state-federal relationships,”
    4 later decisions 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.