Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 367 FSUPP 583 - Klein v. Mayo

Klein v. Mayo’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
2
states following
February 1981
most recently cited

2 district · 4 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 28 U.S.C. § 2281 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Boddie v. Connecticut · Loving v. Commonwealth of Virginia · Reed v. Reed · Frontiero v. Richardson · Maynard v. Hill

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

  1. “It is true that the only Massachusetts tenancy tailored exclusively for married persons appears to be balanced in favor of males. There is no equivalent female-biased tenancy, nor is there a “neutral” married persons’ tenancy providing for indefeasible survivorship but not vesting paramount lifetime rights in the male. Married couples may, it is true, elect a joint tenancy, a tenancy in common, or a sole tenancy. However, the survivor-ship feature of a joint tenancy may be destroyed by partition. A wife who wants the security of indefeasible survivorship can achieve it only by means of a male-dominated tenancy. 367 F.Supp. at 585.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Marriage has long been held to be a social relation clearly subject to state regulation. Maynard v. Hill, 125 U.S. 190 , 8 S.Ct. 723 , 31 L.Ed. 654 (1888); Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 7 , 87 S.Ct. 1817 , 18 L.Ed.2d 1010 (1967); Boddie v. Connecticut, 401 U.S. 371, 376 , 91 S.Ct. 780 , 28 L.Ed.2d 113 (1971). This contention is without merit.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Any person, except a tenant by the entirety, owning a present undivided legal estate in land, not subject to redemption, shall be entitled to have partition in the manner hereinafter provided.”
    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.