Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 745 F.2d 1406 - Williams v. City of Dothan

Williams v. City of Dothan’s Empirical Analysis

745 F.2d 1406 · 1984

Citation profile

52
cited by 52 later decisions
1
states following
January 2016
most recently cited

29 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently January 2016 · most notably Burton v. City of Belle Glade (1999), Barnes v. Southwest Forest Industries, Inc. (1987)

29 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

1801984199020002010decided

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

Relies on Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co. · Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp. · Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation · Washington v. Davis · Castaneda v. Partida

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

  1. “The 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 courts of such state. 3”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “an affirmative duty to provide to blacks their proportionate share of governmental services, employment, and rights of representation on city boards and commissions, in order to remedy the effects of past denial to blacks of access to the political process.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “blanket authorization . . . to prohibit disclosure of information whenever it deems it advisable to do so, but is rather a grant of power to impose conditions on discovery in order to prevent injury, harassment, or abuse of the court's processes.”
    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.