Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 723 F.2d 1348 - Waldron v. McAtee

Waldron v. McAtee’s Empirical Analysis

723 F.2d 1348 · 1983

Citation profile

92
cited by 92 later decisions
4
states following
October 2021
most recently cited

49 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 92 later decisions — most recently October 2021 · most notably Government Employees Insurance v. Dizol (1998), Cruz v. Melecio (2000)

49 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions

42019831990200020102020decided

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 Younger v. Harris · Railroad Commission v. Pullman Co. · City of Los Angeles v. Lyons · Grayned v. City of Rockford · Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc.

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.

  1. “[T]he court has the power and in an appropriate case the duty to order abstention, if necessary for the first time at the appellate level, even though no party is asking for it.”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “a collision between the federal courts and state ... legislatures,”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “If a statute is attacked as being excessively vague on its face, meaning that it is susceptible of being misapplied in a variety of possible situations, the state court is unlikely to be able to give it an interpretation that will prevent any of these possible misapplications, so probably abstention would not enable the constitutional issue to be avoided.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.