906 F. Supp. 2d 59 - Ram v. Lal’s Empirical Analysis
2012
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1651 · 28 U.S.C. § 2283 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1985
Relies on Younger v. Harris · Elrod v. Burns · Lugar v. Edmondson Oil Co. · Steffel v. Thompson · Gomez v. Toledo
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he Court finds that the State Court and the Receiver are necessary parties to the action and must be before this Court in order to effectuate the requested injunction.”
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.