Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 253 F.3d 1124 - Margaret Vaughn v. Sutton Ruoff

Margaret Vaughn v. Sutton Ruoff’s Empirical Analysis

253 F.3d 1124 · 2001

Citation profile

42
cited by 42 later decisions
September 2023
most recently cited

28 federal appellate · 5 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently September 2023 · most notably Wilson v. Lawrence County (2001), Atkinson v. City of Mountain View (2013)

28 federal appellate · 5 district ·

290200120102020decided

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 Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Anderson v. Creighton · City of Cleburne Texas v. Cleburne Living Center · County of Sacramento v. Lewis

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

  1. “de novo the denial of a motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “we subscribe to a broad view of the concept of clearly established law, and we look to all available decisional law, including decisions from other courts, federal and state, when there is no binding precedent in this circuit.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[W]e will affirm the denial of a qualified immunity claim if there exists a genuine issue of material fact concerning the officers' knowledge or if the moving party is not entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.