Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 152 F.3d 77 - Ayers v. Ryan

Ayers v. Ryan’s Empirical Analysis

152 F.3d 77 · 1998

Citation profile

39
cited by 39 later decisions
1
states following
July 2020
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently July 2020 · most notably Mitchell v. Horn (2003), Amato v. City of Saratoga Springs (1999)

7 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

1801998200020102020decided

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 Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Sandin v. Conner · Hodge v. Police Officers · Samuels v. Mockry · Rodriguez v. Phillips

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

  1. “Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for damages resulting from the performance of discretionary official functions if their conduct “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Rodriguez v. Phillips, 66 F.3d 470, 475 (2d Cir.1995) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982)). Summary judgment may be granted on this ground if the defendant shows that (1) the asserted right was not clearly established, or (2) it was nonetheless objectively reasonable for the official to believe the conduct did not violate it. 66 F.3d at 475 . To win summary judgment on the latter ground, the official “must produce such uncontroverted facts that a jury — drawing all inferences favorable to plaintiff— would have to conclude it was objectively reasonable for defendant to believe his actions did not violate an established federally protected right.” Id.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Summary judgment is proper if, viewing all facts of record in a light most favorable to the non-moving party, no genuine issue of material fact remains for adjudication.”
    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.