Rykers v. Alford’s Empirical Analysis
832 F.2d 895 · 1987
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently September 2019 · most notably Hand v. Gary (1988), Chrissy Medley v. Mississippi Department of Public Welfare (1991)
17 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 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 18 U.S.C. § 1073 · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2675
Relies on Harlow v. Fitzgerald · United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs · Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Imbler v. Pachtman · Barr v. Matteo
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“However, the courts have declared that the domestic relations exception [to federal jurisdiction] is to be interpreted narrowly and that a case should not be dismissed merely because the parties are from the same family and a domestic dispute forms part of the context of the litigation ... The decisive factor is not the formal label attached to the claim (tort, contract, etc.), but the type of determination that the federal court must make in order to resolve the case ... if the court need only decide whether an already-set custody or child support award had been complied with, or whether the parties have committed acts that would be actionable even if everyone involved was unrelated, then the federal courts should retain the case.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Evans v. Dale · Mauro v. Mauro“administrative or investigatory functions that are not an integral part of the judicial process,”
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.