Sweeney v. Bond’s Empirical Analysis
669 F.2d 542 · 1982
Citation profile
49 federal appellate · 8 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 92 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2010 · most notably Board of County Commissioners Wabaunsee County Kansas v. Umbehr (1996), O'Hare Truck Service, Inc. v. City of Northlake (1996)
49 federal appellate · 8 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
Relies on Elrod v. Burns · Branti v. Finkel · Kissinger v. Halperin · Halperin v. Kissinger · Kissinger v. Halperin
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 92 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“to extend the patronage decisions to cases which do not involve public employees.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“First, there is no requirement that fee agents actually work in their offices. Fee agents may select their employees and then delegate duties to them without DOR approval. Aside from accounting for the tax and license money collected, fee agents operate their offices with autonomy not generally accorded State employees. Fee agents supply, at their own expense, office space and equipment, and pay salaries determined by the agents. Fee agents may, and frequently do engage in other business endeavors. They may locate their fee agent office in commercial facilities. Agents are not paid by the State, but instead are statutorily authorized to charge the public for their services. Fee agents pay self-employment taxes. They are not members of the state retirement system.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Stein v. James · Horn v. Kean“the ultimate inquiry is not whether the label `policymaker' or `confidential' fits a particular position; rather the question is whether the hiring authority can demonstrate that party affiliation is an appropriate requirement for the effective performance of the public office involved.”
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.