Partnow v. Moran’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 28 U.S.C. § 2281
Relies on Monroe v. Pape · Railroad Commission v. Pullman Co. · Dombrowski v. Pfister · Zwickler v. Koota · England v. Louisiana State Board of Medical Examiners
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The paradigm case for abstention arises when the challenged state statute is susceptible of “a construction by the state courts that would avoid or modify the constitutional question, [citing eases] More fully, we have explained: Where resolution of the federal constitutional question is dependent upon, or may be materiálly altered by, the determination of an uncertain issue of state law, abstention may be proper in order to avoid unnecessary friction in federal-state relations, interference with important state functions, tenatative decisions on questions of state law, and premature constitutional adjudication. * * * Harman v. Forssenius, 380 U.S. 528, 534 [ 85 S.Ct. 1177 , 14 L.Ed.2d 50 ] (1965).”
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.