Clark v. Coye’s Empirical Analysis
60 F.3d 600 · 1995
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably Easyriders Freedom F.I.G.H.T. v. Hannigan (1996), Katie Ludin (2007)
14 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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. § 1292 · 28 U.S.C. § 1651 · 42 U.S.C. § 1396 (§ 1900 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1396A (§ 1902 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988
Relies on Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education · United States v. New York Telephone Co. · Edgar v. Mite Corp. · System Federation No. 91 v. Wright · Delaware v. New York
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“scrutinize the injunction closely to make sure that the remedy protects the plaintiffs' constitutional rights and does not require more of state officials than is necessary to assure their compliance with the constitution.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[T]he scope of federal injunctive relief against an agency of state government must always be narrowly tailored to enforce federal constitutional and statutory law only.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“be deemed to have committed an abuse of discretion . . . if its injunction requires any more of state officers than demanded by federal constitutional or statutory law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Katie Ludin
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.