Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 117 F.3d 1015 - Gustafson v. Jones

Gustafson v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis

117 F.3d 1015 · 1997

Citation profile

87
cited by 87 later decisions
1
states following
January 2025
most recently cited

40 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 87 later decisions — most recently January 2025 · most notably Thompson v. Illinois Department of Professional Regulation (2002), Forseth v. Village of Sussex (2000)

40 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

4201997200020102020decided

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

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Anderson v. Creighton · Pickering v. Board of Education of Township High School District 205 Will County Illinois · Connick v. Myers · Kentucky v. Graham

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

  1. “`it would be a rare case indeed where the pleadings as a whole would permit judgment as a matter of law' in favor of the employer.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff cannot prove any facts that would support his claim for relief.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “In order to establish a First Amendment retaliation claim, the facts alleged in the complaint must show that (1) the speech in which the plaintiffs engaged was constitutionally protected under the circumstances, and (2) the defendants retaliated against them because of it.”
    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.