Bell v. Duperrault’s Empirical Analysis
367 F.3d 703 · 2004
Citation profile
44 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 78 later decisions — most recently January 2021 · most notably McDonald v. Village of Winnetka (2004), Cordi-Allen v. Conlon (2007)
44 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 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
Relies on City of Cleburne Texas v. Cleburne Living Center · Bishop v. Wood · Village of Willowbrook v. Olech · City of New Orleans v. Dukes · McDonald v. Santa Fe Trail Transportation Co.
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 78 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“eliminate any reasonably conceivable state of facts that could provide a rational basis for the classification.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“equal protection claims. In this case, we find that McDonald has failed to present evidence of a similarly situated individual and we AFFIRM the district court's grant of summary judgment on this basis. 11 Notes: 1 Solberg admits that in the October 1999 email he was referring to the May 12 fire. He also acknowledges that, although the email suggests otherwise, he led the investigation of the May 12 fire 2 Moreover, Hernandez later stated that it had been raining earlier in the day, and there was”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[a] class of one equal protection claim may be brought where (1) the plaintiff alleges that he has been intentionally treated differently from others similarly situated and (2) that there is no rational basis for the difference in treatment or the cause of the differential treatment is a `totally illegitimate animus' toward the plaintiff by the defendant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Lunini v. Grayeb
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.