Jenkins v. Keating’s Empirical Analysis
147 F.3d 577 · 1998
Citation profile
22 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 60 later decisions — most recently February 2025 · most notably Woods v. City of Chicago (2000), Cook Estate of Tessier v. Sheriff of Monroe County Florida (2005)
22 federal appellate · 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 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · United States v. Mendenhall · Beck v. State of Ohio · Hunter v. Bryant · Penn v. Parke State Bank
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 60 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[s]o long as a reasonably credible witness or victim informs the police that someone has committed, dr is committing, a crime, the officers have probable cause to place’the alleged culprit under arrest”); Tangwall, 135 F.3d at 520 (recognizing that “the law is clear that a believable victim's single identification can provide the basis for probable cause”); Sharrar v. Felsing, 128 F.3d 810, 818 (3rd Cir.1997) (stating that”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“if either the federal law' he is asserted to have breached was not clearly established at the time of the alleged violation or there exists no genuine dispute of material fact which would prevent a finding that his actions, with respect to following such clearly established law, were objectively reasonable.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[W]here a district court makes a tentative in limine ruling excluding evidence, the exclusion of that evidence may only be challenged on appeal if the aggrieved party attempts to offer such evidence at trial.”
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.