Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 19 F.3d 552 - Roland v. Ew Phillips

Roland v. Ew Phillips’s Empirical Analysis

19 F.3d 552 · 1994

Citation profile

54
cited by 54 later decisions
3
states following
September 2019
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 54 later decisions — most recently September 2019 · most notably Cady v. Marcella (2000), Marcella Richman v. Michael Sheahan (2001)

11 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

220199420002010decided

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 United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs · Pierson v. Ray · Baker v. McCollan · Stump v. Sparkman · Briscoe v. W

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

  1. “Absolute quasi-judicial immunity derives from absolute judicial immunity.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Whether a valid judicial order is verbal or written, an executing law enforcement official is protected by absolute quasi-judicial immunity.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “In Roland , the Eleventh Circuit held ■ - When we have a writ which is fair on its face, issued from a court which had jurisdiction both of the parties and of'the subject-matter of the suit in which it was issued, and which was issued in the regular course of judicial proceeding by that court, and which the officer of the court in whose hands it was placed is bound to obey, the implementing officer is protected in executing the court’s mandate.”
    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.