Cammack’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 10 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 68 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably Cantrell v. City of Long Beach (2001), Williams v. Lara (2001)
12 federal appellate · 10 district · 6 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
Relies on Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States · Allen v. Wright · McGowan v. State of Maryland Gallagher · Lemon v. Kurtzman · Missouri v. Continential Insurance Cos.
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 68 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]e conclude that municipal taxpayer standing simply requires the `injury' of an allegedly improper expenditure of municipal funds. . . .”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Hoohuli, the leading case on this issue in the circuit, does not require that the taxpayer prove that her tax burden will be lightened by elimination of the questioned expenditure”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“is not satisfied ... by the mere existence of some secular purpose, however dominated by religious purposes.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Cammack · Cammack v. Waihee
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.