Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 491 F.3d 717 - New West Lp v. City of Joliet

New West Lp v. City of Joliet’s Empirical Analysis

491 F.3d 717 · 2007

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
September 2020
most recently cited

12 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently September 2020 · most notably Mercatus Group, LLC v. Lake Forest Hospital (2011), Swetlik v. Crawford (2013)

12 federal appellate ·

160200720102020decided

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 Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Franchise Tax Board of the State of California v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern California · Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp. · Eastern Railroad Presidents Conference v. Noerr Motor Freight, Inc. · Gladstone, Realtors v. Village of Bellwood

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. “New West contends that § 8 and the Fair Housing Act [ 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601-19 ] prevent condemnation of Evergreen Terrace, but it does not rely on any particular provision of that statute. Section 8 is a subsidy program, a carrot rather than a stick. HUD’s regulations implementing the § 8 program contemplate the possibility of the parcel’s condemnation; they do not purport to forbid condemnations. See 24 C.F.R. §§ 245.405 , 248.101. For its part, the Fair Housing Act forbids discrimination in housing programs without providing that any given housing development has a right to continued existence. Just as with § 8, federal regulations implementing the FHA cover the demolition of housing projects. 24 C.F.R. Part 970, and exempt condemned buildings from these rules, see 24 C.F.R. § 970.3 . If Joliet thinks that a given parcel of land should be put to a public use, such as a park, and is willing to foot the bill, it is hard to see any obstacle in federal law.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Noerr - Pennington has been extended beyond the antitrust laws, where it originated, and is today understood as an application of the first amendment's speech and petitioning clauses.”
    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.