Wilson v. Wilson’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 3 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently January 2011
4 federal appellate · 3 district · 5 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Shapiro v. Thompson · Grubb v. Oklahoma · Ramstead v. Morgan · Brown v. Supreme Court of Virginia · Titus v. Supreme Court of Virginia
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It may be that a requirement of Oregon residence on the date of admission would have to be supported by a compelling state interest. Assuming this is so, a state clearly has a compelling state interest in “promoting the speedy and efficient administration of justice in its courts by assuring the competence and discipline of its bar . . . ” Aronson v. Ambrose, 479 F.2d 75, 77 (3rd Cir. 1973). The requirement that new admit-tees be state residents at the time of admission is a permissible method by which to promote this compelling state interest. Aronson, supra, at 77-78 ; Brown v. Supreme Court of Virginia, 359 F.Supp. 549, 556-59 (E.D.Va.), aff’d memo. 414 U.S. 1034 , 94 S.Ct. 533 , 38 L.Ed.2d 327 (1973); Suffling v. Bondurant, 339 F.Supp. 257 (D.N.M.), aff’d memo. 409 U.S. 1020 , 93 S.Ct. 460 , 34 L.Ed.2d 312 (1972).”
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.