Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 31 F.3d 873 - Franklin v. Foxworth

Franklin v. Foxworth’s Empirical Analysis

31 F.3d 873 · 1994

Citation profile

95
cited by 95 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
September 2020
most recently cited

40 federal appellate · 6 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 95 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2020 · most notably Los Angeles County, California v. Rettele (2007), Mattos v. Agarano (2011)

40 federal appellate · 6 district · 5 state decisions

4201994200020102020decided

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. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Anderson v. Creighton · Graham v. Connor · Tennessee v. Garner

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

  1. “[a] detention conducted in connection with a search may be unreasonable if it is unnecessarily painful, degrading, or prolonged, or if it involves an undue invasion of privacy.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “A detention conducted in connection with a search may be unreasonable if it is unnecessarily painful, degrading, or prolonged, or if it involved an undue invasion of privacy. Detentions, particularly lengthy detentions, of the elderly, or of children, or of individuals suffering from serious illness or disability raise additional concerns. Of course, the presence of any of these factors in an individual case does not establish that the detention is unreasonable per se. Rather, these factors, along with the Graham elements and any other circumstances relevant to an individual ease, must be assessed in their totality.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “by removing a gravely ill and semi-naked man [the plaintiff] from his sickbed without providing any clothing or covering, and then by forcing him to remain sitting handcuffed in his living room for two hours rather than returning him to his bed within a reasonable time after the search of his room was completed.”
    2 later decisions 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.