Gossmeyer v. McDonald’s Empirical Analysis
128 F.3d 481 · 1997
Citation profile
41 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 129 later decisions — most recently July 2022 · most notably Peso Chavez v. The Illinois State Police (2001), Brokaw v. Mercer County (2000)
41 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 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. § 1367 · 28 U.S.C. § 1441 · 28 U.S.C. § 1446 · 28 U.S.C. § 1447 · 28 U.S.C. § 2679 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Anderson v. Creighton · Graham v. Connor · Hishon v. King & Spalding
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 129 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“it is clear that no relief could be granted under any set of facts that could be proved consistent with the allegations.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a] right is clearly established when its contours are sufficiently clear so that a reasonable official would realize that what he is doing violates that right. This does not mean that there has to be a case on point holding that the officials’ exact conduct is illegal before we will find the officials liable; however, in the light of preexisting law the unlawfulness must be apparent.”
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.