Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 191 FRD 16 - Mack v. Suffolk County

Mack v. Suffolk County’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
1
states following
November 2018
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 15 district · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Bell v. Wolfish · Friends of the Earth Incorporateds v. Laidlaw Environmental Services Inc · City of Los Angeles v. Lyons · Amchem Products, Inc. v. Windsor · Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin

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

  1. “[t]o require Plaintiff to prove that each individual search was unsupportable, as well as indiscriminate, would be unnecessary and unfair. Given that these women were routinely strip searched, the burden rests on Defendants to demonstrate that particular searches were reasonable.”
    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.