Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 402 U.S. 535 - Bell v. Burson

Bell v. Burson’s Empirical Analysis

1971

Citation profile

4,283
cited by 4,283 later decisions
160
cited 160 times by the Supreme Court
49
states following
July 2024
most recently cited

706 federal appellate · 398 district · 1,912 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4,283 later decisions (160 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2024 · most notably Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth (1972), Mathews v. Eldridge (1976)

706 federal appellate · 398 district · 1,912 state decisions — followed in 49 states

1.8k0197119801990200020102020decided

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 Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. · Gideon v. Wainwright · Goldberg v. Kelly · Shapiro v. Thompson · Armstrong v. Manzo

Cited together with Goldberg v. Kelly · Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Fuentes v. Shevin · Mathews v. Eldridge · Morrissey v. Brewer

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 4,283 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “not to be taken away without that procedural due process required by the Fourteenth Amendment.”
    99 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “notice and opportunity for hearing appropriate to the nature of the case”
    39 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “It is a proposition which hardly seems to need explication that a hearing which excludes consideration of an element essential to the decision ... does not meet [the requirements of the Due Process Clause].”). 8 . See infra Part VI. 9 . Not only does the presumption itself raise due process concerns, the fact that it applies only to the detriment of a small group of unpopular defendants also raises serious equal protection concerns. 10 .This rule allows certification of a class action when common issues”
    23 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.