Spencer v. Casavilla’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently April 2018
2 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 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 1985
Relies on Griffin v. Breckenridge · Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, Inc. · Patterson v. McLean Credit Union · Runyon v. McCrary · United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of America, Local 610 v. Scott
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Our discussion in Carpenters makes clear that it does not suffice for application of § 1985(3) that a protected right be incidentally affected. A conspiracy is not "for the purpose" of denying equal protection simply because it has an effect upon a protected right. The right must be " aimed at "; its impairment must be a conscious objective of the enterprise. Just as the "invidiously discriminatory animus" requirement, discussed above, requires that the defendant have taken his action "at least in part 'because of,' not merely 'in spite of,' its adverse effects upon an identifiable group," so also the "intent to deprive of a right" requirement demands that the defendant do more than merely be aware of a deprivation of right that he causes, and more than merely accept it; he must act at least in part for the very purpose of producing it. That was not shown to be the case here, and is on its face implausible. Petitioners oppose abortion, and it is irrelevant to their opposition whether the abortion is performed after interstate travel .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Reading the clause to encompass this kind of conduct, however, risks creating a section 1981 action whenever a white man strikes a black man in a barroom brawl.... Extending the `equal benefit' clause to private conduct would have the effect of federalizing all racially-motivated state-law torts that implicate `the security of persons and property.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[i]f two or more persons ... conspire, or go in disguise on the highway or on the premises of another, for the purpose of depriving ... any person or class of persons of the equal protection of the laws, or of equal privileges and immunities under the laws”
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.