Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 874 F.2d 608 - Garnett Smith

Garnett Smith’s Empirical Analysis

874 F.2d 608 · 1989

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
December 2018
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2018

2 federal appellate · 1 district ·

401989199020002010decided

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 20 U.S.C. § 4071 (The Equal Access Act)

Relies on Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District · Cantwell v. State of Connecticut · Board of Education of Hendrick Hudson Central School District Bd of Ed Westchester County v. Rowley · Lemon v. Kurtzman · Pullman-Standard v. Swint

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

  1. “Complete deference [to the school district] would render the Act meaningless because school boards could circumvent the Act's requirements simply by asserting that all student groups are curriculum related”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “equal access . . . to . . . any students who wish to conduct a meeting within [the school's] limited open forum”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “one or more noncurriculum related student groups to meet on school premises during noninstructional time,”
    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.