Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 460 F.2d 609 - Karr v. Schmidt

Karr v. Schmidt’s Empirical Analysis

460 F.2d 609 · 1972

Citation profile

134
cited by 134 later decisions
12
states following
July 2024
most recently cited

73 federal appellate · 5 district · 20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 134 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably Woods v. Holy Cross Hospital (1979), Irby v. Sullivan (1984)

73 federal appellate · 5 district · 20 state decisions — followed in 12 states

850197219801990200020102020decided

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 Griswold v. State of Connecticut · United States v. O'Brien · Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District · Williamson v. Lee Optical of Oklahoma, Inc. · Shapiro v. Thompson

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

  1. “is forced against his will to hold himself out symbolically as a person holding ideas contrary, perhaps, to ideas he holds most dear. Forced dress . . . humiliates the unwilling complier, forces him to submerge his individuality in the “undistracting” mass, and in general, smacks of the exaltation of organization over member, unit over component, and state over individual. I always thought this country does not condone such repression.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “alternatives less restrictive of liberty”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““ * * * it [our decision today] reflects recognition of the inescapable fact that neither the Constitution nor the federal judiciary it created were conceived to be keepers of the national conscience in every matter great and small. The regulations which impinge on our daily affairs are legion. Many of them are more intrusive and tenuous than the one involved here. The federal judiciary has urgent tasks to perform, and to be able to perform them we must recognize the physical impossibility that less than a thousand of us could ever enjoin a uniform concept of equal protection or due process on every American in every facet of his daily life.” Karr supra, at 618 .”
    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.