Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 741 F.2d 1169 - Hoohuli v. Ariyoshi

Hoohuli v. Ariyoshi’s Empirical Analysis

741 F.2d 1169 · 1984

Citation profile

209
cited by 209 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
August 2011
most recently cited

148 federal appellate · 11 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 209 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2011 · most notably McGuckin v. Smith (1992), Cantrell v. City of Long Beach (2001)

148 federal appellate · 11 district ·

10301984199020002010decided

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. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1341 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Scheuer v. Rhodes · Warth v. Seldin · Younger v. Harris · Ex Parte: Edward T Young

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

  1. “Ordinarily an order dismissing a complaint but not dismissing the action is not appealable under section 1291 unless circumstances make it clear that the court concluded that the action could not be saved by any amendment of the complaint.”
    27 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “[i]f it appears that the district court intended the dismissal to dispose of the action.”
    19 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “[s]tate taxpayers could still maintain taxpayer suits if their pleadings were sufficient. They were sufficient if they set forth the relationship between taxpayer, tax dollars, and the allegedly illegal government activity.”
    4 later decisions 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.