Bates v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions

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

1. “The people find and declare that the Founding Fathers established a system of representative government based upon free, fair and competitive elections. The increased concentration of political power in the hands of incumbent representatives has made our electoral system less free, less competitive, and less representative. The ability of legislators to serve unlimited number of terms, to establish their own retirement system, and to pay for staff and support services at state expense contribute heavily to the extremely high number of incumbents who are reelected. These unfair incumbent advantages discourage qualified candidates from seeking public office and create a class of career politicians, instead of the citizen representatives envisioned by the Founding Fathers. These career politicians become representatives of the bureaucracy, rather than of the people whom they are elected to represent. To restore a free and democratic system of fair elections, and to encourage qualified candidates to seek public office, the people find and declare that the powers of incumbency must be limited. Retirement benefits must be restricted, state-financed incumbent staff and support services limited, and limitations placed upon the number of terms which may be served.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 958 F. Supp. 1446 - Bates v. Jones

2. “Non-parties have been found in privity with parties to a prior action under very limited conditions. The privity doctrine precludes non-parties from relitigating a case when there is “such an identification of interest of one person with another as to represent the same legal rights.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 967 F. Supp. 405 - Schwartz v. Upper Deck Co.

3. “Due process requires that the nonparty have had a identity of interest with and adequate representation by the losing party in the first action, and that the circumstances have been such that the nonparty should reasonably have expected to be bound by the prior adjudication.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 967 F. Supp. 405 - Schwartz v. Upper Deck Co.