Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 249 Va. 61 - Glasco v. Ballard

Glasco v. Ballard’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

62
cited by 62 later decisions
2
states following
August 2019
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 34 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently August 2019 · most notably TransDulles Center, Inc. v. Sharma (1996), Pahlavi v. Ansari (1997)

6 federal appellate · 34 state decisions

310199520002010decided

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

Relies on Clay v. United States · Russo v. White · Bates v. Devers · Exhibitors Poster Exchange, Inc. v. National Screen Service Corp. · Colby v. Boyden

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

  1. “(1) the parties to the two proceedings must be the same, (2) the issue of fact sought to be litigated must have been actually litigated in the prior proceeding, (3) the issue of fact must have been essential to the prior judgment, and (4) the prior proceeding must have resulted in a valid, final judgment against the party against whom the doctrine is sought to be applied.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The doctrine of collateral estoppel precludes the same parties to a prior proceeding from litigating in a subsequent proceeding any issue of fact that was actually litigated and essential to a final judgment in the first proceeding.”
    1 later decision 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.