Williams Lb v. Kaufman County’s Empirical Analysis
352 F.3d 994 · 2003
Citation profile
22 federal appellate · 3 district · 15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 86 later decisions — most recently July 2022 · most notably Seltzer v. Morton (2007), MBM FINANCIAL v. Woodlands Operating Co. (2009)
22 federal appellate · 3 district · 15 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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 Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Anderson v. Creighton · Bell v. Wolfish
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 86 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A]ny punitive damages-to-compensatory damages “ratio analysis” cannot be applied effectively in cases where only nominal damages have been awarded, such as the § 1983 suit before us. The Supreme Court has counseled that this factor does not impose a mathematical formula for constitutional proportionality, but instead only embodies “a general concern of reasonableness.” [ Gore, 517 U.S. at 582-83 , 116 S.Ct. 1589 ]. Because actions seeking vindication of constitutional rights are more likely to result only in nominal damages, strict proportionality would defeat the ability to award punitive damages at all.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he law is well-established in this Circuit that plaintiffs may recover nominal damages when their constitutional rights have been violated but they are unable to prove actual injury.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bode v. Kenner City · Dyer v. Fyall“Its contours “must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right. This is not to say that an official action is protected by qualified immunity unless the very action in question has previously been held unlawful ... .but it is to say that in the light of pre-existing law. the unlawfulness must be apparent.””
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.