Tron v. Condello’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently June 2015
3 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 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 15 U.S.C. § 77Q (§ 17 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 28 U.S.C. § 2281 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Monroe v. Pape · Bell v. Hood · San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez · Reynolds v. Sims
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Property interests, of course, are not created by the Constitution. Rather, they are created and their dimensions are defined by existing rules or understandings that stem from an independent source such as state law — rules or understandings that secure certain benefits and that support claims of entitlement to those benefits.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“to assist the city of New York in providing essential services to its inhabitants . . . and in creating investor confidence in the soundness of the obligations of such city . . . .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“reasonable, prudent and proper investments for . . . all trustees and other fiduciaries . . . .”
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.