Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 868 F.2d 1043 - Ripplinger v. Collins

Ripplinger v. Collins’s Empirical Analysis

868 F.2d 1043 · 1989

Citation profile

95
cited by 95 later decisions
1
states following
January 2020
most recently cited

48 federal appellate · 14 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 95 later decisions — most recently January 2020 · most notably Kevin Thomas Joyce Baker v. Anchorage Equal Rights Commission Municipality of Anchorage (2000), Diego Militia v. Reno (1996)

48 federal appellate · 14 district · 2 state decisions

58019891990200020102020decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2201 · 42 U.S.C. § 1988 · 47 U.S.C. § 558

Relies on Younger v. Harris · Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp. · Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States · Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc. · Broadrick v. Oklahoma

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

  1. “because the guarantee of free expression is always an area of particular federal concern.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “only if each of the following three factors is present: (1) the case touches on a sensitive area of social policy upon which the federal courts ought not enter unless no alternative to its adjudication is open, (2) constitutional adjudication plainly can be avoided if a definite ruling on the state issue would terminate the controversy, and (3) the proper resolution of the possible determinative issue of state law is uncertain.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “a 'reasonable threat of prosecution for conduct allegedly protected by the Constitution.'”
    2 later decisions 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.