Peterson v. Lindner’s Empirical Analysis
765 F.2d 698 · 1985
Citation profile
29 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 63 later decisions — most recently February 2024 · most notably Chrysler Credit Corporation v. Country Chrysler Inc S (1991), Ellis v. United States (2002)
29 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 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 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2201 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Catlin v. United States · Steffel v. Thompson · Plyler v. Doe · City of New Orleans v. Dukes · Vance v. Bradley
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 63 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“First, a court must determine whether the state action infringes upon a fundamental right or discriminates on the basis of a suspect category. If so, the ... action is reviewed under either a strict or intermediate scrutiny standard. ... If no fundamental rights or suspect categories are involved, a court must simply determine whether the differential treatment of similarly situated individuals is rationally related to a legitimate state interest. A party alleging an equal protection challenge involving this standard bears the “heavy burden” of demonstrating that the differences in treatment are to unrelated to legitimate objectives that the only conclusion a court can reach is that the [state’s] actions were irrational.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“In a case of actual controversy within its jurisdiction ... any court of the United States, upon the filing of an appropriate pleading, may 'declare the rights and other legal relations of any interested party seeking such declaration, whether or not further relief is or could be sought. Any such declaration shall have the force and effect of a final judgment or decree and shall be reviewable as such.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[W]hen good reasons for [re-examination] appear (such as new evidence or controlling law, or clear error), the 'law of the case' doctrine must yield to rational decisionmaking.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.