Evans v. Tubbe’s Empirical Analysis
657 F.2d 661 · 1981
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably Adams v. St. Lucie County Sheriff's Department (1993), Casa Marie, Inc. v. Superior Court of Puerto Rico for the District of Arecibo (1993)
10 federal appellate · 2 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 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 1982 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 3601 (§ 801 of the Fair Housing Act (Title VIII, Civil Rights Act of 1968)) · 42 U.S.C. § 3602 (§ 802 of the Fair Housing Act (Title VIII, Civil Rights Act of 1968)) · 42 U.S.C. § 3604 (§ 804 of the Fair Housing Act (Title VIII, Civil Rights Act of 1968)) · 42 U.S.C. § 3610 (§ 810 of the Fair Housing Act (Title VIII, Civil Rights Act of 1968))
Relies on Baker v. Carr · Bell v. Hood · Powell v. McCormack · Hagans v. Lavine · Duke Power Co. v. Carolina Environmental Study Group, Inc.
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) Failing to accept or consider a bona fide offer because of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin. (2) Refusing to sell or rent a dwelling to, or to negotiate for the sale or rental of a dwelling with, any person because of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin. (3) Imposing different sales prices or rental charges for the sale or rental of a dwelling upon any person because of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin. (4) Using different qualification criteria or applications, or sale or rental standards or procedures, such as income standards, application requirements, application fees, credit analysis or sale or rental approval , procedures or other requirements, because of race, color, religion, sex,' handicap, familial status, or national origin. (5) Evicting tenants because of their race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin or because of the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin of a tenant’s guest.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It shall be unlawful to coerce, intimidate, threaten or interfere with any person in the exercise or enjoyment of, or on account of his having exercised or enjoyed, or on account of his having aided or encouraged any other person in the exercise or enjoyment of, any right granted or protected by [the Fair Housing Act].”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“vacant land which is offered for sale or lease for the construction or location thereon”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Cox
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.