Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 85 F.3d 146 - Clark v. Alexander

Clark v. Alexander’s Empirical Analysis

85 F.3d 146 · 1996

Citation profile

49
cited by 49 later decisions
2
states following
March 2019
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 9 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably GTE South, Inc. v. Morrison (1999), Pine Ridge Coal Company v. Local United Mine Workers of America Local United Mine Workers of America (1999)

4 federal appellate · 9 district · 2 state decisions

260199620002010decided

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. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988 · 5 U.S.C. § 706

Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Goldberg v. Kelly · United States v. Utah Construction & Mining Co. · General Electric Co. v. Gilbert

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

  1. “[f]actual determinations relating to the individual circumstances of the family ... based on a preponderance of the evidence presented at the hearing.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Goldberg places five requirements on the termination process employed by a housing authority: (1) timely notice from the housing authority stating the basis for the proposed termination, (2) an opportunity by the tenant to confront and cross-examine each witness relied on by the housing authority, (3) the right of the tenant to be represented by counsel, (4) a decision, based solely on evidence adduced at the hearing, in which the reasons for the decision are set forth, and (5) an impartial decision maker.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.