Fair Assessment in Real Estate Assn., Inc. v. McNary’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
387 federal appellate · 180 district · 169 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,377 later decisions (55 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2025 · most notably Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman (1984), Hudson v. Palmer (1984)
387 federal appellate · 180 district · 169 state decisions — followed in 25 states
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedFair Assessment in Real Estate Ass'n v. McNary (from Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1341 · 28 U.S.C. § 1342 · 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988
Relies on Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Younger v. Harris · Ex Parte: Edward T Young · Monroe v. Pape · Fay v. Noia
Cited together with Rosewell v. National Bank · California v. Grace Brethren Church · Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co. v. Huffman · Younger v. Harris · Tully v. Griffin, Inc.
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 1,377 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The district courts shall not enjoin, suspend or restrain the assessment, levy or collection of any tax under State law where a plain, speedy and efficient remedy may be had in the courts of such State.”
127 later decisions quote this exact passage““ ‘The special reasons justifying the policy of federal noninterference with state tax collection are obvious. The procedures for mass assessment and collection of state taxes and for administration and adjudication of taxpayers’ disputes with tax officials are generally complex and necessarily designed to operate according to established rules. State tax agencies are organized to discharge their responsibilities in accordance with the state procedures. If federal declaratory relief were available to test state tax assessments, state tax administration might be thrown into disarray, and taxpayers might escape the ordinary procedural requirements imposed by state law. During the pendency of the federal suit the collection of revenue under the challenged law might be obstructed, with consequent damage to the State’s budget, and perhaps a shift to the State of the risk of taxpayer insolvency.’ ” 454 U.S. at 137 n.27 (Brennan, J., concurring) (quoting Perez v. Ledesma, 401 U.S. 82 , 128 n. 17, 27 L. Ed. 2d 701 , 91 S. Ct. 674 [1971] [Brennan, J., concurring and dissenting]).”
17 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“as that phrase has been used in articulating the doctrine of equitable restraint, and those which are”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.