Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 995 F.2d 772 - Mitchell v. Clayton

Mitchell v. Clayton’s Empirical Analysis

995 F.2d 772 · 1993

Citation profile

35
cited by 35 later decisions
3
states following
November 2024
most recently cited

15 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently November 2024 · most notably National Association for the Advancement of Psychoanalysis Cedrus Monte, Ayres v. City of Chicago (1997)

15 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

1201993200020102020decided

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 Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman · Roe v. Wade · Williamson v. Lee Optical of Oklahoma, Inc. · Washington v. Harper · In re Disbarment of Graves

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

  1. “most federal courts have held that a patient does not have a constitutional right to obtain a particular type of treatment or to obtain treatment from a particular provider if the government has reasonably prohibited that type of treatment or provider”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “rationally related to a legitimate state interest.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[T]he General Assembly could have concluded that [certain] level[s] of education provide[ ] better training in theories of disease. Logically, better training leads to better diagnosis and better treatment. ... [I]t is within the legislative prerogative to limit the practice of medicine to those who provide the safest service. ... It would even be rational for a legislature to conclude that the training offered in a school of naprapathy would in fact be inadequate for proper medical diagnosis and treatment and therefore people seeking treatment from those who hold only a degree in naprapathy run a serious risk of either misdiagnosis or non-diagnosis of their ailment.”
    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.