green
Positive treatment
4.0 score
Treatment trajectory · 1973 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1973
1999
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Kirk v. Carpeneti
See Wells v. Edwards, 409 U.S. 1095 , 93 S.Ct. 904 , 34 L.Ed.2d 679 (1973), summarily aff'g, 347 F.Supp. 453 (M.D.La.1972); Chisom v. Roemer, 501 U.S. 380, 389-90 , 111 S.Ct. 2354 , 115 L.Ed.2d 348 (1991) (acknowledging Wells’s constitutional holding in a judicial election case resolved on statutory grounds).
discussed
Cited "see"
Blankenship v. Bartlett
See 347 F.Supp. 453 (M.D.La.1972), aff'd mem., 409 U.S. 1095 , 93 S.Ct. 904 , 34 L.Ed.2d 679 (1973). 5 Of course, we recognize that when "construing and applying our [state] laws and the Constitution of North Carolina, [North Carolina appellate courts are] not bound by the decisions of federal courts, including the Supreme Court of the United States." State ex rel.
cited
Cited "see"
Field v. Michigan
See Wells v. Edwards, 409 U.S. 1095, 1095-98 , 93 S.Ct. 904 , 34 L.Ed.2d 679 (1973).
discussed
Cited "see"
Nipper v. Smith
See Wells v. Edwards, 409 U.S. 1095 , 93 S.Ct. 904 , 34 L.Ed.2d 679 (1973) 34 The Supreme Court developed the three-part Gingles threshold test in a case challenging North Carolina's multimember legislative district scheme.
cited
Cited "see"
Nipper v. Smith
See Wells v. Edwards, 409 U.S. 1095 , 93 S.Ct. 904 , 34 L.Ed.2d 679 (1973). .
discussed
Cited "see"
Concerned Citizens for Equality v. McDonald
See Wells v. Edwards, 347 F.Supp. 453 (M.D.La.1972) (holding that judicial elections not subject to "one person, one vote” because nature of the office is not "representative”), summarily aff'd, 409 U.S. 1095 , 93 S.Ct. 904 , 34 L.Ed.2d 679 (1973); But see Chisom v. Roemer, 501 U.S. 380 , 111 S.Ct. 2354 , 115 L.Ed.2d 348 (1991) (holding that judicial elections are "representative” within meaning of Voting Rights Act).
discussed
Cited "see"
Chisom v. Edwards
See Wells v. Edwards, 347 F.Supp. 453 (M.D.La.1972) (three-judge court) (holding that the “one man/one vote" principle of apportionment does not apply to states’ judiciaries), aff’d mem., 409 U.S. 1095 , 93 S.Ct. 904 , 34 L.Ed.2d 679 (1973). 52 .
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Anthony v. Michigan
See, e.g., Wells v. Edwards, 347 F.Supp. 453 (M.D.La.1972), summarily aff'd, 409 U.S. 1095 , 93 S.Ct. 904 , 34 L.Ed.2d 679 (1973).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Mallory v. Eyrich
See also Wells v. Edwards, 347 F.Supp. 453 (M.D.La.1972), aff'd mem., 409 U.S. 1095 , 93 S.Ct. 904 , 34 L.Ed.2d 679 (1973).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Mallory v. Eyrich
See also Wells v. Edwards, 347 F.Supp. 453 (M.D.La.1972), aff'd mem., 409 U.S. 1095 , 93 S.Ct. 904 , 34 L.Ed.2d 679 (1973).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Kokas
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 72-609.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 8, 1973.
Published
C. A. 7th Cir. Certiorari denied.