Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 118 F.3d 1099 - Monday v. Oullette

Monday v. Oullette’s Empirical Analysis

118 F.3d 1099 · 1997

Citation profile

117
cited by 117 later decisions
March 2024
most recently cited

45 federal appellate · 3 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 117 later decisions — most recently March 2024 · most notably Vinyard v. Wilson (2002), Champion v. Outlook Nashville, Inc. (2004)

45 federal appellate · 3 district ·

7501997200020102020decided

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 · Illinois v. Gates · Graham v. Connor · Bell v. Wolfish · City of Los Angeles v. Heller

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

  1. “of dangerous behavior, not an actual showing of such behavior. Id. (citing Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 , 245 n. 13, 103 S.Ct. 2317, 76 L.Ed.2d 527 (1983)). Just as actual innocence will not render invalid an arrest that is properly based upon probable cause that criminal activity was occurring, a mental health seizure can rest upon probable cause even when the person seized does not actually suffer from a dangerous mental condition. Id. Courts evaluate the existence of probable cause from the perspective of a reasonable and objective person in the position of the seizing official. Id.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[A] state official is not entitled to qualified immunity if `there is a genuine issue of material fact concerning whether a reasonable person, exercising professional judgment and possessing the information before the defendant, would have believed that [an individual was a danger to himself or others].'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Without weighing the evidence or assessing the credibility of the witnesses, and after drawing all reasonable inferences in favor of plaintiff, [an appeals court] must determine whether the record contains evidence sufficient to have allowed jurors to find in favor of plaintiff.”
    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.