Lelsz v. Kavanagh’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291
Relies on Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education · Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman · Glidden Company v. Zdanok Et Al. · National Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. New York · Public Broadcasting Service v. Network Project
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.
“the parties have made substantial progress during the past six years (especially the last three years) in ways that will be upset and, perhaps, nullified if current applicants are now permitted to intervene as full parties.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Lelsz v. Kavanagh“no Constitutional right to habilitative care, much less habilitative care in the least restrictive setting ...”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Lelsz v. Kavanagh“a close affinity between the P.A.R.T. applicants and the previous applicants for intervention.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Lelsz v. Kavanagh
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.