Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 528 F.2d 1228 - Johnson v. White

Johnson v. White’s Empirical Analysis

528 F.2d 1228 · 1975

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
2
states following
August 2019
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently August 2019 · most notably Abraham Zion Corp. v. Lebow (1985), Acha v. Beame (1976)

13 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 state decisions

12019751980199020002010decided

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 Dandridge v. Williams · Rosado v. Wyman · King v. Smith · Jefferson v. Hackney · Committee for Public Education & Religious Liberty v. Nyquist

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

  1. “[I]n order to obtain a reversal for such an error, a party must show, not only surprise but `prejudice' in the sense of having other material evidence to introduce.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “. Connecticut cannot properly include in the base for [its consolidation plan] shelter allowances sums that were determined under an unlawful attribution of income policy as delineated in Van Lare v. Hurley . . . . While § 402(a)(23) does not require revision of previously lawful plans to achieve a closer approach to perfection, it likewise does not permit continuation of an unlawful scheme simply because it was updated, See Roselli v. Affleck, supra, 508 F.2d at 1282 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The most reasonable construction of this provision is not that it was an attempt by Connecticut to attribute income which in fact was not available, to the dependent children . . ., but rather that it was an effort ... to make sure that relatives did not profit by charging outrageous rents to children who were in no position to protect themselves. Johnson v. White, supra at 1237.”
    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.