Studen v. Beebe’s Empirical Analysis
588 F.2d 560 · 1978
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently November 1996
11 federal appellate · 1 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 Paul v. Davis · Railroad Commission v. Pullman Co. · Griffin v. Breckenridge · Village of Euclid Ohio v. Ambler Realty Co · Burford v. Sun Oil 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.
“Section 1983 does not create a federal cause of action for every wrong committed under color of State law.... Only deprivations of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States are actionable. We agree with the district court-that this zoning dispute is a matter within the jurisdiction of the state courts of Ohio.... The record in the present case reveals no deprivation of any rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution or any laws of the United States.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“... it appears to the Court that such considerations go to the question of whether the zoning is constitutionally impermissible under the standards of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., 272 U.S. 365, 395 [ 47 S.Ct. 114, 121 , 71 L.Ed. 303 ] (1926) as being “clearly arbitrary and unreasonable, having no substantial relation to the public health, safety, morals, or general welfare.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[a]ll zoning plans have inherent within them a discrimination between the various land uses permitted thereunder.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.