White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis
810 F.2d 844 · 1984
Citation profile
41 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 72 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2021 · most notably Inyo County, California v. Paiute-Shoshone Indians of the Bishop Community of the Bishop Colony (2003), Western Air Lines, Inc. v. Port Authority (1987)
41 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 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 25 U.S.C. § 406 · 25 U.S.C. § 465 · 25 U.S.C. § 476 · 25 U.S.C. § 477 · 28 U.S.C. § 1341 · 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 28 U.S.C. § 1362 · 28 U.S.C. § 41
Relies on United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs · Warth v. Seldin · Railroad Commission v. Pullman Co. · Fuentes v. Shevin · Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising Commission
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 72 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“preemption of state law under the Supremacy Clause--at least if based on federal occupation of the field or conflict with federal goals--will not support an action under Sec. 1983, and will not, therefore, support a claim of attorney's fees under Sec. 1988.”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[I]t is doubtful whether [a] Tribe qua sovereign would qualify as a 'citizen of the United States or other person’ eligible to bring an action under § 1983[.]”). 5 . Although we recognize the argument that the majority rule produces an”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.”
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.