Ram v. Rubin’s Empirical Analysis
118 F.3d 1306 · 1997
Citation profile
25 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently March 2024 · most notably Mabe v. San Bernardino County (2001), Kottmyer v. Maas (2006)
25 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions
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 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Anderson v. Creighton · Santosky v. Kramer · Johnson v. Jones · Camarillo v. McCarthy
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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An indictment or serious allegations of abuse which are investigated and corroborated usually gives rise to a reasonable inference of imminent danger.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Demaree v. Pederson · No. 97-55579“it was clear that a parent had a constitutionally protected right to the care and custody of his children and that he could not be summarily deprived of that custody without notice and a hearing except when the children were in imminent danger”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“we reiterate that we do not have jurisdiction to determine the factual issue whether a reasonable officer could have believed that, based on the information known to- [the officer], seizing Ram’s children was lawful. The district court denied [the officer] summary judgment because the pretrial record indicated that genuine issues of material fact existed. This ends our inquiry with regard to [the officer’s] appeal.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.