James v. Bellotti’s Empirical Analysis
733 F.2d 989 · 1984
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 14 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently January 2012 · most notably Baldwin-United Corporation (1985), Carlough v. Amchem Products, Inc. (1993)
9 federal appellate · 14 district · 2 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 25 U.S.C. § 177 · 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1441 · 28 U.S.C. § 1447 · 28 U.S.C. § 2283
Relies on Kline v. Burke Construction Co. · Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers · Federal Communications Commission v. Home Box Office, Inc. · Swansboro Country, Inc. v. Lumberman's Mortgage Co. · Rice v. Norman Williams Co.
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“denial of an injunction is an appealable interlocutory order under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1292(a)(1), and the refusal to remand to the state court, though not directly appealable by itself, is reviewable in conjunction with the interlocutory appeal.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Removal from a State court is proper only if the district court has original jurisdiction ... and the only possible ground for removal here is that the case arose under federal law.... We see no adequate basis for federal jurisdiction, and conclude that this action was improvidently removed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he elements of a federal claim need not be explicitly and comprehensively recited, and there is nothing to prevent a Court from “engag[ing] in a little statutory logic” to deduce elements implicit on the face of the complaint ...”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Therrien v. Hamilton
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.