Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 235 F. Supp. 2d 45 - Mihos v. Swift

235 F. Supp. 2d 45 - Mihos v. Swift’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
February 2004
most recently cited

2 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1927 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Anderson v. Creighton · Mitchell v. Forsyth · New York Times Co. v. Sullivan · Pickering v. Board of Education of Township High School District 205 Will County Illinois · Will v. Michigan Department of State Police

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

  1. “[i]n the exercise of her discretion, Swift had concluded that Mihos'[s] `acts and omissions concerning the Authority's finances, particularly during the time period culminating with the Authority's October 30, 2001[,] [b]oard meeting and immediately thereafter, were fiscally irresponsible, resulting in adverse consequences of substantially decreasing projected revenues of the Authority, damaging the Authority's credit outlook, and creating financial instability.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “expressive elements of Swift's actions arise out of the exercise of her discretion in performing her duties as the Acting Governor of the Commonwealth. Swift was required to exercise that discretion because she was faced with what she perceived to be, among other things, gross fiscal irresponsibility on the part of [Mihos.]”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “Swift further found that the alternative revenue plan prepared by Mihos was created `hurriedly' and in a `haphazard' manner, and that it did not `adequately' compensate for the revenues that had been lost as a result of [Mihos's and Levy's] actions.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.