Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 638 F.2d 262 - Friedman v. Harold

Friedman v. Harold’s Empirical Analysis

638 F.2d 262 · 1981

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
2
states following
December 2022
most recently cited

15 federal appellate · 7 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently December 2022 · most notably Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Public Service Commission of Puerto Rico (1990), Geiselman v. United States (1992)

15 federal appellate · 7 district · 4 state decisions

20019811990200020102020decided

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 Warth v. Seldin · Singleton v. Wulff · Griswold v. State of Connecticut · San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez · Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority

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

  1. “[fjirst, whether the plaintiff-respondents allege “injury in fact” that is a sufficiently concrete interest in the outcome of their suit to make it a case or controversy subject to a federal court’s Art. Ill jurisdiction, and second, whether as a prudential matter, the plaintiff-respondents are proper proponents of- the particular legal rights on which they base their suit.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Economic injury, even of an indirect nature, will establish sufficient concrete adverseness to meet the Article III 'case or controversy'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “third parties themselves usually will be the best proponents of their own rights.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.