Dostert v. Neely’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 28 U.S.C. § 2201 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Pierson v. Ray · Stump v. Sparkman · Skelly Oil Co. v. Phillips Petroleum Co. · Schware v. Board of Bar Examiners of NM · Supreme Court of Virginia v. Consumers Union of the United States, Inc.
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“appeal. Moreover, because Dostert could have and did raise all his constitutional objections in the hearings before the Board and the supreme court,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[Dostert] should have sought review of the state court's [disciplinary] decision by petitioning the United States Supreme Court.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[c]onsiderations of res judicata and collateral estoppel ... require[d] dismissal of this action.”
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.