Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 261 Kan. 6 - Brown v. State

Brown v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

45
cited by 45 later decisions
1
states following
May 2025
most recently cited

10 district · 32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently May 2025 · most notably Dougan v. Rossville Drainage District (2000), Vorhees v. Baltazar (2007)

10 district · 32 state decisions

4001996200020102020decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 2680

Relies on Lustig v. United States · Gillespie v. Seymour · Martindale v. Tenny · Bowman v. Doherty · Margaret S. Rodriguez v. Donald E. Ritchey

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

  1. “Due to the procedural history of this case, the question with which we are concerned is whether an action for recovery of damages suffered as a result of an arrest that occurred as a result of allegedly negligent conduct is an action for the intentional tort of false arrest and thus is barred by the 1-year statute of limitations.... ... Here Brown’s claim of damages arose from his arrest and not from the officers’ negligence.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Notwithstanding that Brown couched his claim in terms of negligence of the officers, “[i]t is the substance of the claim and not the language used in stating it which controls.” Gaudet [v. United States ], 517 F.2d [1034] at 1035 [ (5th Cir.1975)]. The substance of Brown’s claim is for his wrongful arrest and imprisonment. Thus, his claim is subject to the provisions of K.S.A. 60 — 514(b) and must be brought within 1 year.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “false arrest” and “false imprisonment” are both used to mean”
    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.