Fair v. Kirk’s Empirical Analysis
1970
Citation profile
2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently April 1992
2 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. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 2281
Relies on Flast v. Cohen · Connally v. General Construction Co. · Cafeteria & Restaurant Workers Union, Local 473 v. McElroy · Snowden v. Hughes · Williams v. Rhodes
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Cognizant of the definitional difference between ‘suspension’ and ‘removal’, we hold merely that eradication of corrupt practices in state government is such an important responsibility that suspension of a public official prior to a hearing may be consonant with due process. In a case such as this, the state interest in utilizing suspension to preserve the integrity of its offices surely outweighs any individual interest in a pre-suspension hearing.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Roy v. Jones“malfeasance, misfeasance, neglect of duty, drunkenness, incompetence, permanent inability to perform his official duties, or commission of a felony.”
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.