Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 419 U.S. 379 - Fusari v. Steinberg

Fusari v. Steinberg’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

869
cited by 869 later decisions
73
cited 73 times by the Supreme Court
27
states following
January 2024
most recently cited

262 federal appellate · 89 district · 161 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 869 later decisions (73 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2024 · most notably Mathews v. Eldridge (1976), Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill (1985)

262 federal appellate · 89 district · 161 state decisions — followed in 27 states

2830197519801990200020102020decided

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 Edelman v. Jordan · Goldberg v. Kelly · Reynolds v. Sims · Boddie v. Connecticut · Cafeteria & Restaurant Workers Union, Local 473 v. McElroy

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

  1. ““When we summarily affirm without opinion the judgment of a three-judge District Court we affirm the judgment but not necessarily the reasoning by which it was reached. An unexplicated summary affirmance settles the issues for the parties, and is not to be read as a renunciation by the Court of doctrines previously announced in our opinions after full argument. Indeed, upon fuller consideration of an issue under plenary review, the Court has not hesitated to discard a rule which a line of summary affirmances may appear to have established. ...””
    25 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Identification of the precise dictates of due process requires consideration of both the governmental function involved and the private interests affected by official action.”
    22 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “continuing duty to inform the Court of any development which may conceivably affect the outcome”
    4 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.