Cawley v. Warren’s Empirical Analysis
216 F.2d 74 · 1954
Citation profile
53 federal appellate · 7 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 82 later decisions — most recently May 1989 · most notably Hoffman v. Halden (1959), William J. Bauers, Jr. v. Herbert T. Heisel, Jr (1966)
53 federal appellate · 7 district · 5 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. § 1985
Relies on Bradley v. Fisher · Pargoud v. United States · Randall v. Brigham · Alzua v. Johnson · Picking v. Pennsylvania R.
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 82 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““While we can understand from the facts set forth in plaintiff’s complaint her outraged feeling resulting from the charged acts of the defendants, the rule enunciated in the foregoing cases is that, as a matter of public policy, such an injured person is without relief in a civil proceeding.” 216 F.2d at 76-77 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The motion to dismiss the complaint states, inter alia, that the alleged actions charged against the defendants were doné in their official capacities, wherefore they are not amenable to suit under the civil rights act. In this court the defendants likewise contend that they are immune from a suit of this kind. “The law supports this claim of immunity. It extends to and includes judges, prosecuting attorneys and members of a grand jury. “In Alzua v. Johnson, 231 U.S. 106 , 34 S.Ct. 27 , at page 29, 58 L.Ed. 142 , involving a judge, at page 144 the court said: “ ‘ * * * we regard it as fundamental that the immunity of the defendant [the State’s attorney] from this suit is the same as that of judges in the United States, which is established beyond dispute. Bradley v. Fisher, 13 Wall. 335 , 20 L.Ed. 646 ; Randall v. Brigham, 7 Wall. 523 , 19 L.Ed. 285 .’””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Kenney v. Killian
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.