134 F. Supp. 2d 682 - Zapach v. Dismuke’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
3 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1367 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Anderson v. Creighton · Mitchell v. Forsyth
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Whether an act is judicial depends on “the ‘nature’ and ‘function’ of the act, not the ‘act’ itself.” Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 13 , 112 S.Ct. 286 , 116 L.Ed.2d 9 (1991) (quoting Stump, 435 U.S. at 362 , 98 S.Ct. 1099 , 55 L.Ed.2d 331 )). Courts look to two factors in making this determination: the nature of the act, i.e. whether the act is a measure normally performed by a judge, and the expectations of the parties, i.e. whether the parties dealt with the judge in his judicial capacity. See id. at 12, 112 S.Ct. 286 , 502 U.S. 9 , 112 S.Ct. 286 , 116 L.Ed.2d 9 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The principal inquiry in determining content neutrality, in speech cases generally and in time, place, or manner cases in particular, is whether the government has adopted a regulation of speech because of disagreement with the message it conveys. (Citations omitted). The government’s purpose is the controlling consideration. A regulation that serves purposes unrelated to the content of expression is deemed neutral, even if it has an incidental effect on some speakers or messages but not others. (Citations omitted). Government regulation of expressive activity is content neutral so long as it is “justified without reference to the content of the regulated speech.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“approached Plaintiff, put his hand on Plaintiff's arm, tried to grab the paper on which the speech was printed from Plaintiff's hand, and guided him away from the microphone as Plaintiff attempted to continue to read his prepared text.”
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.