Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 656 F.2d 1003 - Searcy v. Williams

Searcy v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

656 F.2d 1003 · 1981

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
February 2017
most recently cited

6 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently February 2017

6 federal appellate ·

901981199020002010decided

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 Yick Wo v. Hopkins · Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education · Castaneda v. Partida · Cannon v. United States · City of Mobile v. Bolden

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

  1. “[T]he tainted origin of the school board has been carried forward to the present day by the self-perpetuating method of selection to the Board. Regardless of whether the school board selection scheme was purposefully conceived to further discrimination, however, the system has clearly operated purposefully to further discrimination. We hold, therefore, that this unique system for selection of the school board that was operated in discriminatory manner, together with the self-perpetuation of the Board of Education ... is violative of the appellants’ rights under the Fourteenth Amendment.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “a system by which a small number of elected or appointed persons select a school board (or fill its vacancies) is basically an appointive system. Appointed school board systems are permissible under the Constitution so long as the appointments are not made in a manner that systematically excludes an element of the population from consideration.”
    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.