Anton v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently July 2015
6 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 Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. · Mennonite Board of Missions v. Adams · Ashlin Transportation Services, Inc. v. Indiana Unemployment Insurance Board · Holland v. King · Northern Indiana Bank & Trust Co. v. State Board of Finance
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a state must provide 'notice reasonably calculated, under all the cireumstances, to apprise interested parties of the pendency of the action' prior to taking steps that will affect a protected interest in life, liberty, or property. Notice is constitutionally adequate when 'the practicalities and peculiarities of the case ... are reasonably met.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“by certified mail to the owner or owners of the real property at their last known address.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Schaefer v. Kumar
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.