72 Misc. 2d 104 - Franklin v. Krause’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
8
cited by 8 later decisions
May 1995
most recently cited
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Relies on Reynolds v. Sims · Gray v. Sanders · 238 F. Supp. 916 - WMCA, Inc. v. Lomenzo · Brown v. State Election Board of the Oklahoma · Jackman v. Bodine
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"the `voting power' of a Supervisor shall be measured `by the mathematical possibility of his casting a decisive vote on a particular matter.' ... the percentages of voting power `shall approximate' the corresponding percentages of population and it further guarantees that no town or city shall be wholly without voting power. Finally, in establishing its general standards for the system, the new plan requires that in preparing each reapportionment of votes defendant-Board shall employ `an independent computerized mathematical analysis' and any other methods which shall `most nearly analyze' the percentages of voting power and population" ( id., 338 N.Y.S.2d at 563 ).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“"`In effect, the proposed law would retain the present Board of Supervisors without material change.... The proponents of the local law urge that the amendments now contain a constitutionally valid plan of reapportionment when considered in terms of "voting power" as determined by a computer. While weighted voting is not illegal per se, the mathematical gyrations necessary to preserve some effective voting power for the smaller political units represented on the Board require the destruction of principles of majoritarean democracy. And, while this principle is not inviolate in those circumstances where a practical and rational basis exists for deviation, it cannot be ignored in the face of viable alternatives. To say that a majority is not a majority for the mere sake of preserving one of many available forms of reapportionment is an unnecessary debasement of the rights of the voters'" ( id. 338 N.Y.S.2d at 565-566 ).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Finally, ... the new plan requires that in preparing each reapportionment ... [the] Board shall employ 'an independent computerized mathematical analysis' and any other methods which shall 'most nearly analyze' the percentages of voting power and population. 16”
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.