Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 405 F.2d 852 - James E. Shock v. M. L. Tester, Carl E. Miller and Lieutenant Floyd Weaver

James E. Shock v. M. L. Tester, Carl E. Miller and Lieutenant Floyd Weaver’s Empirical Analysis

405 F.2d 852 · 1969

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
2
states following
March 2015
most recently cited

16 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently March 2015 · most notably Kauffman v. Moss (1970), Landrigan v. City of Warwick (1980)

16 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

170196919701980199020002010decided

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 Conley v. Gibson · Yick Wo v. Hopkins · Hague v. Committee for Industrial Organization · Snowden v. Hughes · Cannon 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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The equal protection clause is directed to every form of state action — legislative, executive or judicial. It prohibits discriminatory administration of valid statutes. “ * * * Though the law itself be fair on its face, and impartial in appearance, yet, if it is applied and administered by public authority with an evil eye and an unequal hand, so as practically to make unjust and illegal dis-criminations between persons in similar circumstances, material to their rights, the denial of equal justice is still within the prohibition of the constitution. * * *””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Though the law itself be fair on its face, and impartial in appearance, yet, if it is applied and administered by public authority with an evil eye and an unequal hand, so as practically to make unjust and illegal discriminations between persons in similar circumstances, material to their' rights, the denial of equal justice is still within the prohibition of the Constitution.” Shock v. Tester, 405 F.2d 852, 855 (8th Cir. 1969).”
    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.