68 Cal. 2d 162 - Endler v. Schutzbank’s Empirical Analysis
1968
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 169 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 179 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2018 · most notably Idaho v. Coeur Tribe of Idaho (1997), 31 Cal. 3d 637 - In Re Marriage of Flaherty (1982)
1 federal appellate · 169 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 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Yick Wo v. Hopkins · Pierce v. Society of the Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary Same · Dombrowski v. Pfister · Cafeteria & Restaurant Workers Union, Local 473 v. McElroy · Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee v. McGrath
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 179 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Tjhese decisions establish the principle that any person whose freedom to pursue his profession is seriously restricted by an official action .... may compel the government to afford him a hearing complying with the traditional requirements of due process.... Indeed, even in cases touching the national security, the United States Supreme Court has construed legislation in such a way as to preserve these due process safeguards whenever their disregard might lead to the arbitrary abridgement of the right to practice one’s profession.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[wjhile_important in the case of documentary evidence_is even more important where the evidence consists of the testimony of individuals whose memory might be faulty or who, in fact, might be perjurers or persons motivated by malice, vindictiveness, intolerance, prejudice, or jealousy. We have formalized these protections in the requirements of confrontation and cross-examination. They have ancient roots.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“We are thus concerned here not with the ends which might justify governmental restrictions upon the right to follow a chosen profession but only with the means which government must employ in enforcing admittedly permissible restraints.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.