Evans v. McKay’s Empirical Analysis
869 F.2d 1341 · 1989
Citation profile
26 federal appellate · 6 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently April 2024 · most notably Lindy Pen Company Inc v. Bic Pen Corporation (1993), Alexis v. McDonald's Restaurants of Massachusetts, Inc. (1995)
26 federal appellate · 6 district · 5 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 25 U.S.C. § 450 (§ 2 of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975) · 25 U.S.C. § 450F (§ 102 of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975) · 25 U.S.C. § 450N (§ 111 of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1985
Relies on Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Ex Parte: Edward T Young · Parratt v. Taylor
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 61 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““. .. no action under 42 U.S.C.1983 can be maintained in federal court for persons alleging deprivation of constitutional lights under color of tribal law. In-dian tribes are separate and distinct sovereignties, (citations omitted) and are not constrained by the fourteenth amendment.” R.J. Williams Company, supra at 982 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“To state a claim under Sec. 1983, a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“all persons ... shall have the same right ... to make and enforce contracts ... as is enjoyed by white citizens....”
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.