Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 38 F.3d 147 - Podberesky v. Kirwan

Podberesky v. Kirwan’s Empirical Analysis

38 F.3d 147 · 1994

Citation profile

58
cited by 58 later decisions
1
states following
October 2021
most recently cited

24 federal appellate · 15 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently October 2021 · most notably Hopwood v. Texas (1996), McNamara v. City of Chicago (1998)

24 federal appellate · 15 district · 1 state decisions

3001994200020102020decided

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. § 1291

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Regents of the University of California v. Bakke · City of Richmond v. J. A. Croson Co. · Wygant v. Jackson Board of Education · Johnson v. Transportation Agency, Santa Clara Cty.

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

  1. “[T]he fact that both parties simultaneously are arguing that there is no genuine issue of fact does not establish that a trial is unnecessary thereby empowering the court to enter judgment as it sees fit.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[T]he program more resembles outright racial balancing . . . [and a]s such, it is not narrowly tailored . . .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “to remedy the effects of past discrimination.”
    2 later decisions 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.