Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 49 A.D.2d 6 - Antinore v. State

Antinore v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
5
states following
April 2020
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently April 2020 · most notably Charles Morris v. Ann Lindau (1999), Tedesco v. City of Stamford (1992)

2 federal appellate · 16 state decisions

120197519801990200020102020decided

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.

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

  1. “The fact that this plaintiff did not himself approve the agreement negotiated by his representative and now disclaims satisfaction with one aspect of the agreement makes it no less binding upon him. Labor relations involving any sizeable group cannot be expected to proceed only with the consent of each member of the group. Orderly process requires that agreements be made and complied with even in the face of minority dissent or disapproval.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““* ° * due process requirements — and we think equal protection as well — are not relevant when they have been waived by the party seeking to assert them, as by voluntarily entering into an agreement for the resolution of disputes in a manner which dispenses with one or more of the rights constitutionally guaranteed.” 49 App. Div. 2d 6, 10, 371 N.Y.S.2d 213, 216 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.