Clue v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
179 F.3d 57 · 1999
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 5 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably Cobb v. Pozzi (2003), Nagle v. Marron (2011)
19 federal appellate · 5 district ·
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 Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Anderson v. Creighton · Pickering v. Board of Education of Township High School District 205 Will County Illinois · Connick v. Myers · County of Sacramento v. Lewis
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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Though the court [in Clue ] said in dicta that 'retaliation solely for union activity clearly raises a public concern' ... it obviously did not mean that all activities undertaken through a union necessarily become matters of public concern merely by virtue of their collateral connection to the union.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he most sophisticated opinion on this question carefully distinguishes between `hybrid free speech/ free association claims, to which it believes the public concern requirement should apply, and pure free association claims, to which it concludes the public concern does not and ought not to apply.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[s]ome courts have read Connick to say that a public concern must also be raised for government employees to state a First Amendment associational claim, while others have refused to apply the public concern requirement beyond the category of speech.”
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.