Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 457 A2D 1056 - Landrigan v. McElroy

Landrigan v. McElroy’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
2
states following
May 2010
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 7 district · 11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently May 2010

2 federal appellate · 7 district · 11 state decisions

801983199020002010decided

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

Relies on Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. · Griffin v. People of the State of Illinois · Shapiro v. Thompson · Armstrong v. Manzo

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

  1. “a court may hold a portion of a statute unconstitutional and uphold the rest when the unconstitutional portion is not indispensable to the rest of the statute and can be severed without destroying legislative purpose and intent.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The test for determining the separability of portions of a statute is whether, at the time the statute was enacted, the legislature would have passed it absent the constitutionally objectionable provision.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “as establishing that a state violates the equal-protection clause under any analytical standard when it incarcerates citizens solely because of their economic status.”
    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.