Smith v. Ladner’s Empirical Analysis
1966
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently January 1980
8 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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. § 45
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““This designation and composition of the three-judge court is not a pre-judgment, express or implied, as to whether this is properly a case for a three-judge rather than a one-judge court. This is a matter best detez'mizzed by the tliree-judge court as this enables a simultaneous appeal to the Court of Appeals and to the Supreme Court without the delay, awkwardness, and administrative insufficiency of a proceeding by way of mandamus from either the Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court, or both, directed against the Chief Judge of the Circuit, the presiding District Judge, or both. The parties will be afforded the opportunity to brief and argue, all such questions before the tliree-judge panel either preliminarily or on the trial of the merits, or otherwise, as that Court thinks appropriate.””
2 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.