Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 117 F.3d 1318 - Evans v. Hightower

Evans v. Hightower’s Empirical Analysis

117 F.3d 1318 · 1997

Citation profile

38
cited by 38 later decisions
1
states following
October 2019
most recently cited

22 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently October 2019 · most notably Alexander v. Fulton County (2000), Rankin v. Evans (1998)

22 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

210199720002010decided

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 Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Anderson v. Creighton · Tennessee v. Garner · Brower v. County of Inyo · Ansley v. Heinrich

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

  1. “defendant government official must prove that he was acting within the scope of his discretionary authority when the alleged wrongful act occurred.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “demonstrate that the defendant violated clearly established law based upon objective standards.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Evans failed to offer any evidence that the act of running him over with a patrol car was intended as a means to seize him. In fact, Evans was seized prior to being hit by the car. He was seized when Mathis ordered him at gunpoint to lie on the ground. The act of being run over by Hightower’s car was not part of the seizure, but was rather, “the accidental effect[] of otherwise lawful government conduct.” This record shows only that Mathis was negligent and is devoid of any evidence that Mathis intended that Hightower’s car strike Evans.”
    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.