Nutter v. Dougherty’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
5 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 2 U.S.C. § 431 (§ 301 of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971)
Relies on Buckley v. Valeo · Pap's A.M. v. City of Erie · Cali v. Philadelphia · Council of Middletown Township v. Benham · Harris-Walsh, Inc. v. Dickson City Borough
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The cases presenting mootness problems involve litigants who clearly had standing to sue at the outset of the litigation. The problems arise from events occurring after the lawsuit has gotten underway — changes in the facts or in the law — which allegedly deprive the litigant of the necessary stake in the outcome. The mootness doctrine requires that an actual case or controversy must be extant at all stages of review, not merely at the time the complaint is filed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[n]otwithstanding the grant of powers contained in this act, no city shall exercise powers contrary to, or in limitation or enlargement of, powers granted by acts of the General Assembly”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Nutter v. Dougherty“that when the legislature has preempted a field the state has retained all regulatory and legislative power for itself and therefore prohibits local legislation in that area.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Nutter v. Dougherty
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.