Montero v. Meyer’s Empirical Analysis
861 F.2d 603 · 1988
Citation profile
16 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently October 2016 · most notably Ruiz v. Hull (1998), Delgado v. Smith (1988)
16 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 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. § 1973 (§ 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965) · 42 U.S.C. § 1973A (§ 3 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965) · 42 U.S.C. § 1973B (§ 4 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965) · 42 U.S.C. § 1973L (§ 14 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965)
Relies on Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner · Aetna Life Ins Co of Hartford Conn v. Haworth · Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co. · United States Parole Commission v. Geraghty · Blanchette v. Connecticut General Insurance Corporations
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Whenever any State or political subdivision [subject to the bilingual electoral requirements] ... provides any registration or voting notices, forms, instructions, assistance, or other materials or information relating to the electoral process, including ballots, it shall provide them in the language of the applicable language minority group as well as in the English language.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Delgado v. Smith“[ t]he acts performed by [state] officers are designed primarily to make the initiative process fair and impartial, and do not constitute providing the petitions to the electorate. At most, the acts of the state officers could be regarded as “regulatory,” but state regulation is insufficient to convert private action into state action.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Delgado v. Smith“A jurisdiction required to provide minority language materials is only required to publish in the language of the applicable language minority group materials distributed to or provided for the use of the electorate generally. Such materials include, for example, ballots, sample ballots, informational materials, and petitions.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Padilla v. Lever
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.