Kimble v. D. J. McDuffy, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
648 F.2d 340 · 1981
Citation profile
44 federal appellate · 8 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 96 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2021 · most notably Kush v. Rutledge (1983), United States v. Thevis (1982)
44 federal appellate · 8 district · 1 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1503 · 42 U.S.C. § 1985
Relies on Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co. · Griffin v. Breckenridge · Touche Ross & Co. v. Redington · Bates v. State Bar · Santa Fe Industries, Inc. v. Green
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.
“A. If two or more persons conspire to deter, by force, intimidation, or threat, any party or witness in any court of the United States from attending such court, or from testifying to any matter pending therein ... or B. to injure such party or witness in his person or property on account of his having so attended or testified, or C. if two or more persons conspire for the purpose of impeding, hindering, obstructing, or defeating, in any manner, the due course of justice in any State or Territory, with intent to deny to any citizen the equal protection of the laws, or D. to injure him or his property for lawfully enforcing ... the right of any person, or class of persons, to the equal protection of the laws.”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A. if two or more persons in any State or Territory conspire to deter, by force, intimidation, or threat, any party or witness in any court of the United States from attending such court, or from testifying to any matter pending therein, freely, fully, and truthfully, or B. to injure such party or witness in his person or property on account of his having so attended or testified....”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he class-based animus required by the Supreme Court in Griffin and now reasserted by this court is not identical with the class-based distinctions required to support an action under the equal protection clause .... For example, section 1985 was certainly intended to cover conspiracies against Republicans; distinctions based on affiliation with a major political party are not among those traditionally subject to special scrutiny under the Fourteenth Amendment. What Griffin stands for, and what we now hold, is that Section 1985 was intended to encompass only those conspiracies motivated by animus against the kinds of classes Congress was trying to protect when it enacted the Ku Klux Klan Act.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Scott v. Moore · Scott v. Moore
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.