Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 334 FSUPP 744 - Reese v. Kassab

Reese v. Kassab’s Empirical Analysis

1971

Citation profile

38
cited by 38 later decisions
5
states following
August 2005
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 3 district · 24 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently August 2005 · most notably John E. Raper v. David J. Lucey (1973), Leonard W. Ferguson v. John S. Gathright, Superintendent Bland Correctional Farm (1973)

6 federal appellate · 3 district · 24 state decisions

3201971198019902000decided

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

Relies on United States v. O'Brien · Armstrong v. Manzo · Bell v. Burson · Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee v. McGrath · Whiteley v. Warden, Wyoming State Penitentiary

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

  1. “The fatal defect in the statute at bar is that there is no provision made for any type of administrative hearing with notice and an opportunity to be heard before the revocation action becomes effective. Hence, the possibility exists that error in a conviction record could result in the revocation of the license of an innocent motorist. Under these circumstances, we conclude that the essentials of due process require the opportunity for some sort of meaningful administrative hearing prior to the revocation of an operator's license.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““It is fundamental that except in emergency situations . . . due process requires that when a State seeks to terminate an interest such as that here involved, it must afford ‘notice and opportunity for hearing appropriate to the nature of the case’ before the termination [or suspension or revocation] becomes effective.” (Emphasis in original.)”
    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.