Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 301 F.2d 639 - Marshall v. Sawyer

Marshall v. Sawyer’s Empirical Analysis

301 F.2d 639 · 1962

Citation profile

188
cited by 188 later decisions
5
states following
October 2019
most recently cited

121 federal appellate · 17 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 188 later decisions — most recently October 2019 · most notably Basista v. Weir (1965), Hornsby v. Allen (1964)

121 federal appellate · 17 district · 6 state decisions

790196219701980199020002010decided

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 18 U.S.C. § 1952 · 18 U.S.C. § 2421 (White-Slave Traffic Act of 1910 (Mann Act)) · 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 28 U.S.C. § 2281 · 28 U.S.C. § 2284 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Monroe v. Pape · Poller v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. · Screws v. United States · Burton v. Wilmington Parking Authority

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

  1. ““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 or law, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress.””
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “. must be such as to make it clear that the court determined that the action could not be saved by any amendment of the complaint which the plaintiff could reasonably be expected to make, thereby entitling plaintiff to assume that he had no choice but to stand on his complaint. Marshall v. Sawyer, 301 F.2d 639 (9th Cir. 1962).”
    10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““The avoidance of the obligation of federal courts to decide cases in which they have jurisdiction can be justified under the doctrine of abstention ‘only in the exceptional circumstances where the order to the parties to repair to the state court would clearly serve an important countervailing interest.’ ” Marshall v. Sawyer, 301 F.2d 639, 645 (9th Cir. 1962), quoting County of Allegheny v. Frank Mashuda Co., 360 U.S. 185, 188-189 , 79 S.Ct. 1060, 1062-63 , 3 L.Ed.2d 1163 (1959).”
    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.