Thacker’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
2 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 101 later decisions — most recently August 2023 · most notably Rankin, Lamar Wright v. City of Euclid (2020)
2 district · 6 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 Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Conley v. Gibson · Harlow v. Fitzgerald · United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs
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 101 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[s]omeone had placed a 911 call reporting an emergency-a cutting or stabbing-at the residence. [The plaintiff] answered the door shirtless, with blood on his legs and boxer shorts. It was apparent that [the plaintiff] himself was injured ... [he] acted belligerently and used profanity. ... [and] [h]e appeared intoxicated.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“facts and circumstances within the officer's knowledge that are sufficient to warrant a prudent person, or one of reasonable caution, in believing, in the circumstances shown, that the suspect has committed, is committing or is about to commit an offense.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“As in Darrah, in the present case, the district court analyzed plaintiffs’ claims under the standards in Frantz and Spurlock. However, the Darrah Court ultimately concluded that a cause of action must be recognized under Spurlock. We agree that we are obliged to follow Spurlock and recognize a separate constitutionally cognizable claim of malicious prosecution under the Fourth Amendment.”
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.