Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 552 F.2d 172 - Linda Kay Sparkman and Leo Sparkman v. Ora E. McFarlin

Linda Kay Sparkman and Leo Sparkman v. Ora E. McFarlin’s Empirical Analysis

552 F.2d 172 · 1977

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
7
states following
February 2018
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2018 · most notably Stump v. Sparkman (1978), Briley v. California (1977)

10 federal appellate · 11 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.

Appellate journey

Relationships

Relies on Pierson v. Ray · Bradley v. Fisher · Pargoud v. United States · Guardianship of Kemp · Wade v. Bethesda Hospital

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

  1. “hereby approve the above Petition by affidavit form on behalf of Ora Spitler McFarlin, to have Tubal Ligation performed upon her minor daughter, Linda Spitler, subject to said Ora Spitler McFarlin covenanting and agreeing to indemnify and keep indemnified Dr. John Hines and the DeKalb Memorial Hospital from any matters or causes of action arising therefrom.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “all other causes, matters and proceedings where exclusive jurisdiction thereof is not conferred by law upon some other court, board or officer.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “an illegitimate exercise of his common law power because of his failure to comply with elementary principles of procedural due process.”
    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.