Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 457 U.S. 255 - Hathorn v. Lovorn

Hathorn v. Lovorn’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

571
cited by 571 later decisions
44
cited 44 times by the Supreme Court
10
states following
October 2019
most recently cited

217 federal appellate · 42 district · 53 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 571 later decisions (44 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2019 · most notably Harris v. Reed (1989), Pennsylvania v. Ritchie (1987)

217 federal appellate · 42 district · 53 state decisions — followed in 10 states

28201982199020002010decided

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 New York Times Co. v. Sullivan · Stone v. Powell · Michigan v. Tyler · California Retail Liquor Dealers Assn. v. Midcal Aluminum, Inc. · Allen v. State Board of Elections

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

  1. “State courts may not avoid deciding federal issues by invoking procedural rules that they do not apply evenhandedly to all similar claims.”
    12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[A] state procedural ground is not 'adequate' unless the procedural rule is 'strictly or regularly followed.' Barr v. City of Columbia, 378 U.S. 146 , 149 [84 S.Ct. 1734, 1736, 12 L.Ed.2d 766] (1964).”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “which results in a denial or abridgement of the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color, or in contravention of the guarantees set forth in section 10303(f)(2) [concerning language minority groups].”
    3 later decisions 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.