Poe v. Menghini’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 9 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2021 · most notably Roe v. Wade (1973), Doe v. Bolton (1973)
9 federal appellate · 9 district · 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. § 2201 · 28 U.S.C. § 2281 · 28 U.S.C. § 2283 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Younger v. Harris · Griswold v. State of Connecticut · Flast v. Cohen · Meyer v. State of Nebraska · Pierce v. Society of the Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary Same
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he plaintiff has “a personal stake and interest [which is] arrayed against persons with adverse legal interests in a sufficiently immediate adversary context to warrant declaratory relief” consideration. Poe v. Menghini, 339 F.Supp. 986 (D.Kan.1972) citing Golden v. Zwickler, 394 U.S. 103 , 89 S.Ct. 956 , 22 L.Ed.2d 113 (1969).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““This provision suffers from a second constitutional defect. The JCAH is a private, non-profit corporation with headquarters outside the State of Kansas. To this private concern the Kansas Legislature has delegated the power to promulgate standards binding on Kansas hospitals, at least if therapeutic abortions are to be performed in their facilities. In the event an unaccredited hospital, such as the Douglass Hospital, lend? its facilities to the performance of therapeutic abortions, it may be subject to criminal prosecution. Many years ago, the Kansas Supreme Court defined the following limitation on the legislative power: “ ‘The legislature cannot delegate to private individuals and private associations the power to make obligatory rules concerning the management and care of property, nor can it provide that the breach of such rules shall be a penal offense. Kansas v. Crawford, 104 Kan. 141 , 177 P. 360 (1919).’ "This rule is compatible with present federal constitutional law. Carter v. Carter Coal Co., 298 U.S. 238 , 56 S.Ct. 855 , 80 L.Ed. 1160 (1935). In this case, the Kansas Legislature has acted in apparent disregard of this constitutional limitation on their powers of delegation. And particularly since the result of this delegation has been the infringement of a fundamental right, the delegation violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.” 339 F. Supp. at 994, 995 .”
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.