Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 506 FSUPP 134 - Smith v. Puett

Smith v. Puett’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
May 2000
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 28 U.S.C. § 1441 · 28 U.S.C. § 1442 · 28 U.S.C. § 2201 · 28 U.S.C. § 2412 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988 · 42 U.S.C. § 601 (§ 401 of the Social Security Act of 1935)

Relies on Dandridge v. Williams · Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores · Quern v. Jordan · Hagans v. Lavine · Hutto v. Finney

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

  1. “The Court exercises its discretion in assessing attorney’s fees to the State defendants as costs in the case. In its defense, DHS places responsibility for enforcement of the flawed policy at issue upon HEW. This responsibility is misplaced, however; DHS failed to seek a declaratory judgment, a remedy which could have been pursued by its salaried attorneys. DHS cannot now be heard to complain that free legal services are not provided it by the plaintiffs.”
    1 later decision 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.