Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 549 F.2d 120 - Davids v. Akers

Davids v. Akers’s Empirical Analysis

549 F.2d 120 · 1977

Citation profile

44
cited by 44 later decisions
2
states following
March 2012
most recently cited

21 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently March 2012 · most notably Vander Jagt v. O'Neill (1983), United States v. Best (1978)

21 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions

17019771980199020002010decided

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

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Ex Parte: Edward T Young · Baker v. Carr · Roe v. Wade · Elrod v. Burns · Reynolds v. Sims

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

  1. “[t]he principle that such procedures are for the House itself to decide is as old as the British Parliament.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “to tell the Speaker of the ... House of Representatives how many Democrats, and perhaps even which Democrats, he is to appoint to the standing committees, and perhaps to each such committee.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “... An individual citizen, voting for a candidate for public office, is in a very different position from an elected member of a legislative body, such as Arizona’s House of Representatives. It is true that, like the elector, the member has one vote as a member of the House. Nothing in the record, however, suggests that his vote is different from that of each other member. He has no more right to have other members vote with him than an elector has to have other electors vote with him. Neither has a right to win. Each has a right to have his vote counted, with the same weight as every other vote. That, the member has.”
    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.