Bradley v. Milliken’s Empirical Analysis

772 F.2d 266 · 1985

Citation profile

cited by 32 later decisions

January 2007

most recently cited

19 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently January 2007 · most notably United States v. Michigan (1991), Sierra Club v. Marsh (1990)

19 federal appellate ·

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. § 1292

Relies on Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Coopers & Lybrand v. Livesay · Rideout v. United States · Milliken v. Bradley · Carson v. American Brands, Inc.

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

“serious, perhaps irreparable consequence”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. Gary Knop, John Ford, William Lovett, Ii, Ramando Valeroso, Gus Jansson, Pat Sommerville, Vernard Cohen, Jon Spytma, Robert Shipp, Butch Davis, Ron Mixon, Kerwin Cook, Cross-Appellees v. Perry M. Johnson, Robert Brown, Dale Foltz, John Jabe, Theodore Koehler, John Prelesnik, Jack Bergman, Cross-Appellants · Brown v. Brown
“make sufficiently detailed findings of fact and conclusions of law under Rule 52(a), Fed.R.Civ.P., to advise the parties of the factual basis for its decision.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. 475 F. Supp. 2d 1118 - RC EX REL. ALA. DISABILITIES ADVOCACY v. Walley · 390 F. Supp. 2d 1030 - RC EX REL. ALA. DISABILITIES ADVOCACY v. Walley
“[A]lthough the parties had an opportunity to address the district court as a general matter, they lacked an opportunity to address it on the specific subject of the district court's action.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. 282 U.S. App. D.C. 271 - United States v. Western Electric Co. · United States v. Western Electric Co.

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.