Confederated Salish v. Simonich’s Empirical Analysis
29 F.3d 1398 · 1994
Citation profile
27 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably Green v. City of Tucson (2001), Porter v. Jones (2003)
27 federal appellate · 3 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. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 28 U.S.C. § 1651
Relies on Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Younger v. Harris · Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp. · Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States · Railroad Commission v. Pullman Co.
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.
“(1) the case touches on a sensitive area of social policy upon which the federal courts ought not enter unless no alternative to its adjudication is open, (2) constitutional adjudication plainly can be avoided if a definite ruling on the state issue would terminate the controversy, and (3) [the proper resolution of] the possible determinative issue of state law is uncertain.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) The party seeking the writ has no other adequate means, such as a direct appeal, to attain the 'relief he or she desires. (2) The petitioner will be damaged or prejudiced in a way not correctable on appeal. (3) The district court’s order is clearly erroneous as.a matter of law. (4) The district court’s order is an oft-repeated error, or manifests a persistent disregard of the federal rules. (5) The district court’s order raises new and important problems, or issues of law of first impression.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a] district court order abstaining under Younger and dismissing the case ends the litigation. It is a final appealable order.”
2 later decisions 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.