Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 361 F.3d 772 - Kopec v. Tate

Kopec v. Tate’s Empirical Analysis

361 F.3d 772 · 2004

Citation profile

193
cited by 193 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
February 2024
most recently cited

29 federal appellate · 24 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 193 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2024 · most notably Voci v. Gonzales (2005), Gilles v. Davis (2005)

29 federal appellate · 24 district · 2 state decisions

1050200420102020decided

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.

Appellate journey

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Anderson v. Creighton · Graham v. Connor · Ring v. Arizona · Duncan v. Walker

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

  1. “[a]ny person who has been deprived of any substantive due process or equal protection rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or any substantive rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of this State, or whose exercise or enjoyment of those substantive rights, privileges or immunities has been interfered with or attempted to be interfered with, by threats, intimidation or coercion by a person acting under color of law.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[1] the severity of the crime at issue, [2] whether the suspect poses an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others, [3] whether he actively is resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight[, 4] the possibility that the persons subject to the police action are violent or dangerous, [5] the duration of the action, [6] whether the action takes place in the context of effecting an arrest, [7] the possibility that the suspect may be armed, and [8] the number of persons with whom the police officers must contend at one time.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “in light of the facts and circumstances confronting them, without regard to their underlying intent or motivations.'”
    3 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.