Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 780 F.3d 728 - Iqbal v. Patel

Iqbal v. Patel’s Empirical Analysis

780 F.3d 728 · 2015

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
August 2024
most recently cited

1 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1964 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1738

Relies on District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman · Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co. · Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Industries Corp. · Lance v. Dennis · Noel v. Hall

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

  1. “The Rooker-Feldman doctrine is concerned not with why a state court’s judgment might be mistaken (fraud is one such reason; there are many others) but with which federal court is authorized to intervene. The reason a litigant gives for contesting the state court’s decision cannot endow a federal district court with authority; that’s what it means to say that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine is jurisdictional.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[I]f a plaintiff contends that out-of-court events have caused injury that the state judiciary failed to detect and repair, then a district court has jurisdiction— but only to the extent of dealing with that injury.... [T]he federal court cannot set aside the state court’s judgment.”
    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.