Berry v. Bourne’s Empirical Analysis
588 F.2d 422 · 1978
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently August 2020 · most notably Texfi Industries, Inc. v. City of Fayetteville (1980), 103 Wash. 2d 663 - City of Seattle v. State (1985)
8 federal appellate · 9 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 Gomillion v. Lightfoot · Kramer v. Union Free School District No. 15 · Cipriano v. City of Houma · Hunter v. City of Pittsburgh · Gordon v. United States
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Annexation by a city or town is purely a state political or legislative matter, entirely within the power of the legislature to regulate.... Thus [Hunter v. Pittsburgh ], has been held to foreclose attacks on a state procedure specifically on either due process or equal protection grounds.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he important fact is that the action of the freeholders in signing the request for annexation does not authorize annexation. Annexation depends wholly on the favorable vote of the governing body of the annexing city. This is the crucial action and on that neither freeholders nor electors as such have a vote. Since the electors of the municipality of the area to be annexed are not given the right to vote under the challenged statute, the application of the statute poses no equal protection issue.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Clearly, if the statute before us had provided that annexation required the favorable vote of the freeholders of the area to be annexed and made no provision for voting by the electors of that area, the statute would be condemned as violative of the equal protection clause. However, that is not the procedure under the statute under review. There is, we repeat, no election either for freeholders or electors and Hayward [sic] is not in point.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Muller v. Curran
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.