Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 372 FSUPP 109 - Almeida v. Lucey

Almeida v. Lucey’s Empirical Analysis

1974

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
3
states following
April 1995
most recently cited

4 district · 10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 1995

4 district · 10 state decisions

100197419801990decided

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. § 2284 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Gideon v. Wainwright · Younger v. Harris · Goldberg v. Kelly · Duncan v. State of Louisiana · United States v. Tucker

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

  1. “[f]or a determination adequate to support revoking a license, a non-jury [state] district court proceeding provides all the necessary elements of due process.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(1) That he suffered deprivation of a valuable right without due process (2) That the revocation provision of M.G.L. c. 90 § 2(a)(c) [§ 24(2)(a, c)] constitutes an unconstitutional penalty on the right to trial by jury in the Massachusetts “two tier trial de novo system.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “no appeal ... shall operate to stay the revocation of the license.”
    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.