Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 117 F.3d 1321 - Madiwale v. Savaiko

Madiwale v. Savaiko’s Empirical Analysis

117 F.3d 1321 · 1997

Citation profile

97
cited by 97 later decisions
3
states following
March 2024
most recently cited

29 federal appellate · 2 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 97 later decisions — most recently March 2024 · most notably Holloman ex rel. Holloman v. Harland (2004), Jones v. Cannon (1999)

29 federal appellate · 2 district · 6 state decisions

3701997200020102020decided

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 18 U.S.C. § 242 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 48 U.S.C. § 1983

Relies on Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Anderson v. Creighton · Franks v. Delaware · Bonner v. City of Prichard · Behrens v. Pelletier

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

  1. “[A] warrant affidavit violates the Fourth Amendment when it contains omissions made intentionally or with a reckless disregard for the accuracy of the affidavit ... if inclusion of the omitted facts would have prevented a finding of probable cause.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[I]n the light of pre-existing law, the unlawfulness must be apparent.”
    2 later decisions 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.