Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 476 F.2d 225 - Eslinger v. Thomas

Eslinger v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis

476 F.2d 225 · 1973

Citation profile

82
cited by 82 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
November 1996
most recently cited

35 federal appellate · 12 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 82 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 1996 · most notably Lake Country Estates, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (1979), Supreme Court of Virginia v. Consumers Union of the United States, Inc. (1980)

35 federal appellate · 12 district · 5 state decisions

600197319801990decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Monroe v. Pape · Pierson v. Ray · McGowan v. State of Maryland Gallagher · Powell v. McCormack

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

  1. ““Thus, Reed , in a case of invidious sex discrimination, prescribed as a test of validity the presence of a ‘fair and substantial’ relation between the basis of the classification and the object of the classification. A classification based on sex is less than suspect; a validating relationship must be more than minimal. What emerges is an ‘intermediate approach’ between rational basis and compelling interest as a test of validity under the Equal Protection Clause.” (footnotes omitted)”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “. . . in the area of sex-discrimination, the inchoate state of legal guidelines suggests that good faith, coupled with reasonable grounds to believe one is acting within the law, should be sufficient to preclude liability for damages. (Footnote omitted) Properly applied, such a test, based on the circumstances of each case, maintains the effectiveness of § 1983 actions, while providing conscientious state officials with some protection against the cutting edge of a rapidly developing legal doctrine.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The protection of the speech or debate clause of the Constitution of the United States has been extended to state legislators. Tenney v. Brandhove, 341 U.S. 367 , 71 S.Ct. 783 , 95 L.Ed. 1019 (1951).”
    2 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.