Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 139 F.2d 776 - Ravenscroft v. Casey

Ravenscroft v. Casey’s Empirical Analysis

139 F.2d 776 · 1944

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
September 2015
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 4 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2015

9 federal appellate · 4 district ·

8019441950196019701980199020002010decided

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

Relies on Yaselli v. Goff · Yaselli v. Goff · Lange v. . Benedict · Marks v. . Townsend · Graham v. Buffalo General Laundries Corp.

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

  1. ““No cause of action is stated against the defendants Casey, Toucher, Koch and Bassett. They are protected by the fact that they were carrying out orders of County Judge Bailey. Whether his orders were correct or erroneous he had jurisdiction to make them and they provide immunity to the jail authorities who did nothing other than perform them. Marks v. Townsend, 97 N.Y. 590, 601 ; Land Finance Corp. v. Jacoby, 151 Misc. 159, 160 , 272 N.Y.S. 318 . “Police Justice Hughes and County Judge Bailey are protected from civil liability since each acted as a judicial officer in a matter within his jurisdiction as such. * * * The same principle gives immunity to defendant Ferris, the district attorney.””
    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.