Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 457 F.2d 765 - Harris v. Ericson

Harris v. Ericson’s Empirical Analysis

457 F.2d 765 · 1972

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
1
states following
September 2013
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently September 2013

9 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

8019721980199020002010decided

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 42 U.S.C. § 2000A (Civil Rights Act of 1964)

Relies on 315 F. Supp. 13 - United States v. Gray

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

  1. “[A]ny outlawing of the doctrine of exhaustion of remedies does not negate the earlier requirement of the statute that ... the state must be given the opportunity to invoke its remedies. In short, § 2000a3(c) requires that no action shall be brought under that particular section of the act before the expiration of thirty days after notice of such alleged discriminatory act has been given the appropriate state agency; whereas, § 2000a-6(a) simply provides that one who, for example, has given notice to the appropriate state agency need not thereafter exhaust such remedy before the district court acquires jurisdiction.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “In the case of an alleged act or practice prohibited by this subchapter which occurs in a State, or political subdivision of a State, which has a State or local law prohibiting such act or practice and establishing or authorizing a State or local authority to grant or seek relief from such practice or to institute criminal proceedings with respect thereto upon receiving notice thereof, no civil action may be brought under subsection (a) of this section before the expiration of thirty days after written notice of such alleged act or practice has been given to the appropriate State or local authority by registered mail or in person, provided that the court may stay proceedings in such civil action pending the termination of State or local enforcement proceedings.”
    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.