Clark v. Gabriel’s Empirical Analysis
1968
Citation profile
290 federal appellate · 43 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 460 later decisions (16 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2019 · most notably McKart v. United States (1969), Oestereich v. Selective Service System Local Board No. 11 (1969)
290 federal appellate · 43 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 Estep v. United States · United States v. Seeger · Oestereich v. Selective Service System Local Board No. 11 · Falbovs v. United States
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 460 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In Oestereich the delinquency procedure by which the registrant was reclassified was without statutory basis and in conflict with petitioner's rights explicitly established by the statute and not dependent upon an act of judgment by the board. Oestereich, as a divinity student, was by statute unconditionally entitled to exemption. Here, by contrast, there is no doubt of the board's statutory authority to take action which appellee challenges, and that action inescapably involves a determination of fact and an exercise of judgment.”
20 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“No judicial review shall be made of the classification or processing of any registrant by local boards, appeal boards, or the President, except as a defense to a criminal prosecution instituted under section 12 of this title * * *, after the registrant has responded either affirmatively or negatively to an order to report for induction, * * *.”
20 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[I]t takes the extreme case where the Board can be said to flout the law, to warrant preinduction review under Oestereich.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.