Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 553 F.2d 923 - David v. Garrison

David v. Garrison’s Empirical Analysis

553 F.2d 923 · 1977

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
January 2017
most recently cited

15 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently January 2017 · most notably Nevett v. Sides (1978), Jones v. City of Lubbock (1984)

15 federal appellate ·

21019771980199020002010decided

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)) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 703 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)

Relies on Reynolds v. Sims · White v. Regester · Whitcomb v. Chavis · Burns v. Richardson · Gaffney v. Cummings

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. “[dilution is an elusive concept because it cannot be proven by mathematics alone. It reflects a challenge to the usual election system wherein the candidate of the majority of the voters wins the election. Dilution unconstitutionally abridges or dilutes meaningful participation by a minority by virtue of the fact that a majority of the voters, and the successful governing authority elected by that majority simply ignore the governmental needs of a substantial minority of the voters and remains arrogant and unresponsive to the voting strength of that minority. It constitutes a violation of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendment guarantee that all citizens and classes of citizens be afforded some meaningful participation in the election process, not just the right to cast a vote.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “In a small electorate, the plaintiffs must show facts that overcome what would seem to be apparent — that candidates with only modest support could wage an effective campaign in which the merits of their candidacy could be amply exposed to the voters.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “concerns the distribution of municipal jobs and appointments to various boards and commissions.”
    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.