Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 627 F.2d 1 - Kendall v. Board of Education

Kendall v. Board of Education’s Empirical Analysis

627 F.2d 1 · 1980

Citation profile

80
cited by 80 later decisions
7
states following
August 2015
most recently cited

37 federal appellate · 4 district · 8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 80 later decisions — most recently August 2015 · most notably Vanelli v. Reynolds School District No. 7 (1982), Redding v. Fairman (1983)

37 federal appellate · 4 district · 8 state decisions

5501980199020002010decided

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 Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle · Bishop v. Wood · Carey v. Piphus · Vitek v. Jones

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 80 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Kendall was compelled to appear before the same administrators who had investigated the incidents and recommended her dismissal. Since factfinding on the accusations was necessary, due process requires that the same administrators who investigated the matter not determine her guilt or innocence.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Once the plaintiff has established a deprivation of constitutional rights, the burden of proof shifts to the defendant to demonstrate that the deprivation of constitutional rights did not cause the plaintiff’s injury. Mt. Healthy Bd. of Education v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274, 287 , 97 S.Ct. 568, 576 , 50 L.Ed.2d 471 (1977). Thus, after Kendall proved a violation of procedural due process, the Board bore the burden of demonstrating that her dismissal was not caused by its failure to afford her a proper hearing before the dismissal. To meet its burden, the Board must show that it had just cause for the dismissal, that is, that its charges against Kendall are true. See Codd v. Velger, 429 U.S. 624, 630, 635 , 97 S.Ct. 882, 885, 888 , 51 L.Ed.2d 92 (1977) (per curiam) (Brennan, J., and Stevens, J., dissenting).””
    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.