No. 80-3768’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently December 2017 · most notably United States v. Arkison (1994), Michel v. Federated Department Stores, Inc. (1995)
1 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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 Ex Parte: Edward T Young · Edelman v. Jordan · Alyeska Pipeline Service Company v. Wilderness Society · Aetna Life Ins Co of Hartford Conn v. Haworth · Southern Pacific Terminal Company v. Interstate Commerce Commission
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“an action against a state official must be 'based on a theory that the officer acted beyond the scope of his statutory authority or, if within that authority, that such authority is unconstitutional' in order to avoid the bar of the Eleventh Amendment”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[W]here the sovereign consents to be sued in a specially designated court, any resulting waiver is not general but is confined to actions brought in the forum designated.”). States thereby retain the ability to deprive a plaintiff of the right to bring suit in a federal forum, even if the federal courts would otherwise have jurisdiction over the controversy. 7 . Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment, also known as the Fourteenth Amendment’s Enforcement Clause, reads:”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Generally, officers of a state cannot waive its Eleventh Amendment immunity by their mere actions ... [I]n Taylor v. Perini [ 503 F.2d 899 (6th Cir.1974)] ... we held that attorney fees could not be awarded against the State of Ohio despite the consent to those fees by the state attorney general in the district court.”
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.