Conroe Creosoting Co. v. Montgomery County’s Empirical Analysis
249 F.3d 337 · 2001
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably Kinney v. Weaver (2004), Eichenlaub v. Township of Indiana (2004)
12 federal appellate · 1 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
Relies on Daniels v. Williams · County of Sacramento v. Lewis · Johnson v. Jones · Regents of the University of Michigan v. Ewing · Mahone v. Addicks Utility District
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“whether a ... right was clearly established at the time the defendant acted ... requires an assessment of whether the official's conduct would have been objectively reasonable at the time of the incident.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Kinney v. Weaver · Kinney v. Weaver“whether the record indicates that the violation occurred, or gives rise to a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the defendant actually engaged in the conduct that [is alleged to have] violated the clearly established right.”
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.