Camacho v. Bowling’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently June 2017
10 federal appellate · 7 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 42 U.S.C. § 501 (§ 301 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 503 (§ 303 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Mathews v. Eldridge · Wolff v. McDonnell · Boddie v. Connecticut · In the Matter of John Ruffalo Jr · Federal Communications Commission v. Pottsville Broadcasting 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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[f]irst, 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 majoritye.g. Cosby v. Ward
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.