Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 846 FSUPP2D 1131 - Martinez v. Clark County

Martinez v. Clark County’s Empirical Analysis

2012

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
2
states following
February 2019
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1367

Relies on Ex Parte: Edward T Young · Edelman v. Jordan · Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman · Lemon v. Kurtzman · County of Allegheny v. American Civil Liberties Union

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

  1. “case law requiring a plaintiff who challenges the constitutionality of a statute to join everyone conceivably impacted by a declaration that the statute is unconstitutional.... Although Rule 19 arguably favors joinder of certificate holders in this case, the Court finds it impractical and unnecessarily burdensome to require Plaintiffs to join every other person who conceivably may be affected by a declaration that the challenged law is unconstitutional”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “'are such that it will undoubtedly make all' of the absent party's arguments”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “'capable of and willing to make such arguments'”
    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.