Yancey v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis
2011
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 25 U.S.C. § 1901 (§ 2 of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978) · 25 U.S.C. § 1902 (§ 3 of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978) · 25 U.S.C. § 1911 (§ 101 of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978) · 25 U.S.C. § 1912 (§ 102 of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978) · 25 U.S.C. § 1914 (§ 104 of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978) · 25 U.S.C. § 1915 (§ 105 of the Indian Child Welfare Act of 1978) · 28 U.S.C. § 1257 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291
Relies on Younger v. Harris · Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment · District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman · Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co. · Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp.
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“repeatedly spoke in terms of Article III jurisdiction, rather than jurisdiction in general”); cf. Marquez-Almanzar v. INS, 418 F.3d 210 , 216 n. 7 (2d Cir.2005) (”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Abernathy v. Wandes“the so-called doctrine of 'hypothetical jurisdiction,'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Abernathy v. Wandes
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.