Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 439 U.S. 1385 - Kimble v. Swackhamer

Kimble v. Swackhamer’s Empirical Analysis

1978

Citation profile

44
cited by 44 later decisions
4
cited 4 times by the Supreme Court
5
states following
January 2016
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 9 district · 18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 44 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2016 · most notably 36 Cal. 3d 687 - American Federation of Labor-Congress of Industrial Organizations v. Eu (1984), Bustop, Inc. v. Board of Education (1978)

6 federal appellate · 9 district · 18 state decisions

32019781980199020002010decided

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. § 1651

Relies on Leser v. Garnett · Hawke v. Smith

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

  1. “the result of the voting on this question does not place any legal requirement on the legislature or any of its members.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “constitutional obstacle to a nonbinding, advisory referendum of this sort.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “does not concern a binding referendum, nor does it impose a limitation upon the legislature. As already noted, the legislature may vote for or against ratification, or refrain from voting on ratification at all, without regard to the advisory vote. The recommendation of the voters is advisory only.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.