Blum v. Campbell’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently April 2006
9 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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. § 1442
Relies on Barr v. Matteo · Howard v. Lyons · Thorpe v. Housing Authority of Durham · Carr v. Watkins · Bartlett v. Christhilf
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Plaintiff scrambling, discursive letter is not under oath and therefore cannot be considered by the Court under Rule 56”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Purdy v. Newland
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.