Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 803 F.2d 46 - Benjamin v. Malcolm

Benjamin v. Malcolm’s Empirical Analysis

803 F.2d 46 · 1986

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
3
states following
May 2014
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently May 2014 · most notably Yonkers Racing Corp. v. City of Yonkers (1988), Alberti v. Klevenhagen (1995)

14 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

2001986199020002010decided

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. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1651 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Warth v. Seldin · Ex Parte: Edward T Young · Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman · Singleton v. Wulff · Youngberg v. Romeo Ex Rel. Romeo

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

  1. “authorizes a federal court in exceptional circumstances to issue ... orders to persons `who, though not parties to the original action ... are in a position to frustrate the implementation of a court order or the proper administration of justice ...'”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “clearly distinguishable from the present suit where there has been an adjudication of unconstitutionality and the State officials have been joined as third-party defendants allegedly contributing to and implementing that violation of the Constitution.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the presence of the State officials as parties in the case was essential to assure protection of the plaintiffs' adjudicated constitutional rights.”
    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.