Ex Parte Abell’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 1 district · 89 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 104 later decisions — most recently January 2018 · most notably Butnaru v. Ford Motor Co. (2002), Subaru of America, Inc. v. David McDavid Nissan, Inc. (2002)
6 federal appellate · 1 district · 89 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 Terry v. Ohio · Roe v. Wade · Paul v. Davis · Griswold v. State of Connecticut · United States v. Calandra
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 104 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) Communication between a patient and a professional is confidential and shall not be disclosed in civil cases. (2) Records of the identity, diagnosis, evaluation, or treatment of a patient which are created or maintained by a professional are confidential and shall not be disclosed in civil cases.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. In Re Arriola“When the court finds a personal privacy right to be fundamental, the [S]tate must show a compelling interest before invading the designated zone of privacy [strict-scrutiny standard].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Ramirez v. State“[W]here a privacy interest has been recognized but not afforded 'fundamental' status, the [S]tate need only show a rational basis for its interference or regulation in the area.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Ramirez v. State
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.