Roberts v. Anderson’s Empirical Analysis
66 F.2d 874 · 1933
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 3 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently September 2018 · most notably Potashnick v. Port City Construction Co. (1980), Steen v. Board of Civil Service Commissioners (1945)
14 federal appellate · 3 district · 7 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 25 U.S.C. § 375
Relies on Powell v. State of Alabama Patterson · Frank v. Mangum · Cooke v. United States · Interstate Commerce Commission v. Louisville & Nashville Railroad · Moore v. Dempsey
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““What, then, does a hearing include? Historically and in practice, in our own country at least, it has always included the right to the aid of counsel when desired and provided by the party asserting the right. . . . If in any case, civil or criminal, a state or federal court were arbitrarily to refuse to hear a party by counsel, employed by and appearing for him, it reasonably may not be doubted that such a refusal would be a denial of a hearing and therefore, of due process in the constitutional sense.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The right to a hearing includes the right to the assistance of counsel of his own choice, if requested.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The act (Act of 1926) does not clearly refer to heirship proceedings in the probate court; nor are probate proceedings ordinarily removable; an heirship proceeding may indirectly affect the title to lands, or it may not. The point is not necessary to a disposition of the cause, and Congress may clear up any uncertainty that exists before it again arises. We therefore leave it as we find it.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Micco's Estate
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.