Nesmith v. Young Men's Christian Ass'n of Raleigh’s Empirical Analysis
397 F.2d 96 · 1968
Citation profile
25 federal appellate · 6 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 65 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2021 · most notably Roberts v. United States Jaycees (1984), United States v. Hunter (1972)
25 federal appellate · 6 district · 7 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 Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises, Inc. · Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States · Katzenbach v. McClung · Miller v. Amusement Enterprises, Inc.
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 65 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(e) The provisions of this title shall not apply to a private club or other establishment not in fact open to the public, except to the extent that the facilities of such establishment are made available to the customers or patrons of an establishment within the scope of subsection (b)”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““In determining whether an establishment is in fact a private club, there is no single test. A number of variables must be examined in the light of the Act’s clear purpose of protecting only ‘the genuine privacy of private clubs * * * whose membership is genuinely selective * * *’ 110 Cong.Rec. 13697 (1964) (remarks of Senator Humphrey). The first factor is the size of the organization and the open-ended character of its membership rolls. Most private clubs have limited membership, Bradshaw v. Whigman, 11 Race Rel.L.Rep. 934 (S.D.Fla.1966), and easily articulated general admission standards.” 2”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(a) All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section-, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion or national origin. (b) Each of the following establishments which serves the public is a place of public accommodation within the meaning of this subchapter if its operations affect commerce, or if discrimination or segregation is supported by State action: (1)any inn, hotel, motel, or other establishment which provides lodging to transient guests, other than an establishment located within a building which contains not more than five rooms for rent or hire and which is actually occupied by the proprietor of such establishment as his residence; (2) any 'restaurant, cafeteria, lunchroom, lunch counter, soda fountain, or other facility principally engaged in selling food for consumption on the premises, including, but not limited to, any such facility located on the premises of any retail establishment; or any gasoline station; (3) any motion picture house, theater, concert hall, sports arena, stadium or other place of exhibition or entertainment; (4) any establishment (A)(i) which is physically located within the premises of any estab lishment otherwise covered by this subsection, or (ii) within the premises of which is physically located any such covered establishment, and (B) which holds its”
3 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.