United Carolina Bank v. Board of Regents of Stephen F. Austin State University’s Empirical Analysis
665 F.2d 553 · 1982
Citation profile
60 federal appellate · 7 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 122 later decisions — most recently June 2020 · most notably Clark v. Tarrant County (1986), Ramirez v. Puerto Rico Fire Service (1983)
60 federal appellate · 7 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
Relies on Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle · Edelman v. Jordan · Pickering v. Board of Education of Township High School District 205 Will County Illinois · Cort v. Ash
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 122 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A federal court must examine the particular entity in question and its powers and characteristics as created by state law to determine whether the suit is in reality a suit against the state itself. * * * Courts typically look at the degree of local autonomy and control, and most importantly whether the funds to defray any award would be derived from the state treasury. Id.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“either held in the Treasury or restricted as to use. In either event they are subject to audit and budget planning. Thus any award from those funds would directly interfere with the state's fiscal autonomy.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The Eleventh Amendment was fashioned to protect against federal judgments requiring payment of money that would interfere with the state’s fiscal autonomy and thus its political sovereignty. Retroactive monetary relief ... would have just that effect. Mississippi has devised a complex statutory design which governs the state’s schools of higher education and their control by the Board of Trustees. The Board is required to submit budgetary proposals for legislative acceptance. To require refund payments from the Board for overpayment of tuition fees would be the kind of tampering the Eleventh Amendment sought to avoid.”
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.