Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 368 U.S. 25 - Martin v. Walton

Martin v. Walton’s Empirical Analysis

1961

Citation profile

164
cited by 164 later decisions
7
cited 7 times by the Supreme Court
7
states following
June 2014
most recently cited

51 federal appellate · 16 district · 58 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 164 later decisions (7 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2014 · most notably Griswold v. State of Connecticut (1965), National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. Y Button (1963)

51 federal appellate · 16 district · 58 state decisions

670196119701980199020002010decided

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 Yick Wo v. Hopkins · Schware v. Board of Bar Examiners of NM · Cannon v. United States · Allied Stores of Ohio, Inc. v. Bowers · Dent v. State of West Virginia

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

  1. “Upon plenary consideration, we are satisfied that, both on their face and as applied to appellant, Kan.Gen.Stat., 1949, Sec. 7-104, and amended Kan.Sup. Ct. Rules 41 and 54 promulgated by the Supreme Court of Kansas, acting within its competence upon state law, are not beyond the allowable range of state action under the Fourteenth Amendment. . . . We cannot disregard the reasons given by the Kansas Supreme Court for the Rules in question. . . . Nor does the fact that the Rules may result in 'incidental individual inequality' make them offensive to the Fourteenth Amendment. . . .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““[T]he fact that the Rules [concerning admission to the bar] may result in ‘incidental individual inequality’ [does not] make them offensive to the Fourteenth Amendment.””
    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.