Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 826 F.3d 207 - Scott v. Schedler

Scott v. Schedler’s Empirical Analysis

826 F.3d 207 · 2016

Citation profile

24
cited by 24 later decisions
1
states following
June 2025
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1973G (§ 9 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965) · 52 U.S.C. § 20501

Relies on Schmidt v. Lessard · Peregrine Myanmar Ltd. v. Segal · Peaches Entertainment Corporation v. Entertainment Repertoire Associates Inc · Gulf King Shrimp Company v. W. Willard Wirtz, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor · Meyer v. Brown & Root Construction Co.

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

  1. “is not narrowly tailored to remedy the specific action which gives rise to the order as determined by the substantive law at issue.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[a]n injunction must simply be framed so that those enjoined will know what conduct the court has prohibited,”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “We merely remind the district court that its injunction may not encompass more conduct than was requested or exceed the legal basis of the lawsuit.”); Lion Health Servs. Inc. v. Sebelius, 635 F.3d 693 , 703 (5th Cir. 2011) (”
    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.