Lynch v. Dukakis’s Empirical Analysis
719 F.2d 504 · 1983
Citation profile
49 federal appellate · 15 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 112 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2022 · most notably Suter v. Artist M. (1992), Baby Neal v. Casey (1994)
49 federal appellate · 15 district · 6 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)) · 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 602 (§ 402 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 604 (§ 404 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 608 (§ 408 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 627 (§ 427 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 671 (§ 471 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 675 (§ 475 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States · Monroe v. Pape · Weinberger v. Salfi
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 112 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We have considered and rejected the argument that a federal court is without power to review state welfare provisions or prohibit the use of federal funds by the States in view of the fact that Congress has lodged in the Department of HEW the power to cut off federal funds for noncompliance with statutory requirements.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“did not object to the introduction of evidence or introduced evidence himself that was relevant only to [the affirmative defense].”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“The term "case plan” means a written document which includes at least the following: A description of the type of home or institution in which a child is to be placed, including a discussion of the appropriateness of the placement and how the agency which is responsible for the child plans to carry out the voluntary placement agreement entered into or judicial determination made with respect to the child in accordance with section 672(a)(1) of this title; and a plan for assuring that the child receives proper care and that services are provided to the parents, child, and foster parents in order to improve the conditions in the parents’ home, facilitate return of the child to his own home or the permanent placement of the child, and address the needs of the child while in foster care, including a discussion of the appropriateness of the services that have been provided to the child under the plan____”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.