Kush v. Rutledge’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
281 federal appellate · 163 district · 25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 858 later decisions (10 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2024 · most notably Hudson v. Palmer (1984), United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of America, Local 610 v. Scott (1983)
281 federal appellate · 163 district · 25 state decisions
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
reviewedRutledge v. Arizona Board of Regents (from Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Griffin v. Breckenridge · Bates v. State Bar · Versie Kimble v. D. J. McDuffy 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 858 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“some racial, or perhaps otherwise class-based, invidiously discriminatory animus behind the conspirators' action.”
16 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“If two or more persons in any State or Territory conspire to deter, by force, intimidation, or threat, any party or witness in any court of the United States from attending such court, or from testifying to any matter pending therein, freely, fully, and truthfully, or to injure such party or witness in his person or property on account of his having so attended or testified, or to influence the verdict, presentment, or indictment of any grand or petit juror in any such court, or to injure such juror in his person or property on account of any verdict, presentment, or indictment lawfully assented to by him, or of his being or having been such juror; * * * [an action for damages will lie].”
15 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“two or more persons [to] conspire for the purpose of impeding, hindering, obstructing, or defeating, in any manner, the due course of justice in any State or Territory, with intent to deny to any citizen the equal protection of the laws * * *.”
14 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.