Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 725 F.2d 1234 - Marvin Poer and Company v. Counties of Alameda

Marvin Poer and Company v. Counties of Alameda’s Empirical Analysis

725 F.2d 1234 · 1984

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
November 2016
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 3 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently November 2016 · most notably Hoohuli v. Ariyoshi (1984), Bright v. Bechtel Petroleum, Inc. (1986)

12 federal appellate · 3 district ·

901984199020002010decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 1341 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co. v. Huffman · Moe v. Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation · Fair Assessment in Real Estate Assn., Inc. v. McNary · American Party of Texas v. Bullock · Bland v. McHann

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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[t]he district courts shall not enjoin, suspend or restrain the assessment, levy or collection of any tax under State law where a plain, speedy and efficient remedy may be had in the court of such State.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[t]he practical effect on state fiscal operations”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “although the language of the Act does not specifically cover actions for refund or damages, federal court consideration of such cases must be barred lest the Tax Injunction Act be deprived of its full effect.”
    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.