Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 441 FSUPP 127 - Farr v. Chesney

Farr v. Chesney’s Empirical Analysis

1978

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
July 1988
most recently cited

1 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1985 · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)

Relies on Ex Parte: Edward T Young · Edelman v. Jordan · Monroe v. Pape · Ford Motor Co. v. Department of Treasury · Moor v. County of Alameda

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

  1. “[T]he Court is not convinced that a particular agency can be both statewide and local in nature so that only a portion of its activities [is] protected by the Eleventh Amendment depending upon the amount of funding derived from each distinct governmental unit. Therefore, the Court concludes that the activities of the Defendants in connection with their position as members of the Board of the Juniata Valley Office are sufficiently connected with state activities so that any award of back pay against them in their official capacities as board members is prevented by the Eleventh Amendment.”
    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.