Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 661 F.2d 426 - Blaubergs v. Board of Regents

Blaubergs v. Board of Regents’s Empirical Analysis

661 F.2d 426 · 1981

Citation profile

48
cited by 48 later decisions
4
states following
January 2013
most recently cited

17 federal appellate · 4 district · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently January 2013 · most notably Lynn v. Regents of the University of California (1981), Dixon v. Rutgers, the State University of NJ (1988)

17 federal appellate · 4 district · 9 state decisions

3601981199020002010decided

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 Hickman v. Taylor · United States v. Nixon · Keyishian v. Board of Regents of Univ. of State of NY · Regents of the University of California v. Bakke · Trammel v. United States

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

  1. “Persons occupying positions of responsibility, like Dinnan, often must make difficult decisions. The consequences of such responsibility is that occasionally the decision-maker will be called upon to explain his actions. In such a case, he must have the courage to stand up and publicly account for his decision. If that means that a few weak-willed individuals will be deterred from serving in positions of public trust, so be it; society is better off without their services. If the deci sion-maker has acted for legitímate reasons, he has nothing to fear.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Though we recognize the importance of academic freedom, we must recognize its limits. The public policy of the United States prohibits discrimination; Professor Dinnan and the University of Georgia are not above that policy. To rule otherwise would mean that the concept of academic freedom would give any institution of higher learning a carte blanche to practice discrimination of all types.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(E)xceptions to the demand for every man's evidence are not lightly created nor expansively construed, for they are in derogation of the search for truth.”
    2 later decisions 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.