Udc Chairs Chapter American Association of University Professors v. Board of Trustees of University of District of Columbia’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
26 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently May 2024 · most notably James Madison Limited, by Norman F. Hecht, Sr., Assignee v. Eugene A. Ludwig, Comptroller of the Currency (1996), 540 F. Supp. 2d 231 - Marcelus v. Corrections Corp. of America/Correctional Treatment Facility (2008)
26 district · 2 state decisions
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 Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Mathews v. Eldridge · Scheuer v. Rhodes · Morrissey v. Brewer · Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he Supreme Court has established a 'general rule that individuals must receive notice and an opportunity to be heard before the Government deprives them of property.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Courts consider three factors in deciding whether due process has been provided: “[flirst, the private interest that will be affected by the official action; second, the risk of an erroneous deprivation of such interest through the procedures used, and the probable value, if any, of additional or substitute procedural safeguards; and finally, the Government’s interest, including the function involved and the fiscal and administrative burdens that the additional or substitute procedural requirement would entail.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) the private interests ... affected by the official action; (2) the risk of an erroneous deprivation of such an interest through the procedures used and the value, if any, of additional or substitute procedural safeguards; and (3) the [g]overnment’s interest, including the function involved and the fiscal and administrative burdens that the additional or substitute procedural requirements would entail.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.