STUART BY AND THROUGH STUART v. Nappi’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
1 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 20 U.S.C. § 1401 · 20 U.S.C. § 1412 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988
Relies on Hensley v. Eckerhart · Maher v. Gagne · Smith v. Robinson · Jose P. v. Ambach · Stuart v. Nappi
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“guilty of no more that passive acquiescence in his statutory role of supervising compliance), these cases are distinguishable. Judge Glasser concluded, based on his knowledge of the facts of this case with which he has lived for eight years, that”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Koster v. Perales
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.