Flores v. Pierce’s Empirical Analysis
617 F.2d 1386 · 1980
Citation profile
51 federal appellate · 9 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 96 later decisions — most recently July 2022 · most notably Sischo-Nownejad v. Merced Community College District (1991), Traver v. Meshriy (1980)
51 federal appellate · 9 district · 3 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 Scheuer v. Rhodes · Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp. · Washington v. Davis · Carey v. Piphus · Wood v. Strickland
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 96 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[n]o official can in good faith impose discriminatory burdens on a person or group by reason of a racial or ethnic animus against them. The constitutional right to be free from such invidious discrimination is so well established and so essential to the preservation of our constitutional order that all public officials must be charged with knowledge of it.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the evidence permits only one reasonable conclusion as to the verdict.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The violation here consisted not in the ABC’s initial denial of the license, but in the policy of the city officials to force the applicants to undertake extraordinary measures for its issuance. If the rigors of the governmental or administrative process are imposed upon certain persons with an intent to burden, hinder, or punish them by reason of their race or national origin, then this imposition constitutes a denial of equal protection, notwithstanding the right of the affected persons to secure the benefits they seek by pursuing further legal procedures.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.