Zwicker v. Boll’s Empirical Analysis
1967
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently July 2005 · most notably Brooks v. Briley (1967), 310 F. Supp. 293 - Babbitz v. McCann (1970)
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2283 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Connally v. General Construction Co. · Cantwell v. State of Connecticut · National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. Y Button · Dombrowski v. Pfister · Chaplinsky v. State of New Hampshire
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““947.01 Disorderly conduct. Whoever does any of the following may be fined not more than $100 or imprisoned not more than 30 days: “(1) In a public or private place, engages in violent, abusive, indecent, profane, boisterous, unreasonably loud, or otherwise disorderly conduct under circumstances in which such conduct tends to cause or provoke a disturbance; * * *””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“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 persons 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. (emphasis added)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The legal and factual issues in this court are the same as those which would have to be resolved in the state court actions if they were permitted to proceed. The nub question is whether it is appropriate for this court to step in and determine these issues first. Applying common sense principles of comity to the existing situation, I find no compelling reason why this court should assert power to decide these issues in this action and thus displace the state court from a resolution of the same issues in an action already before it.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Vick v. Schiro
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.