Krueger v. Lyng’s Empirical Analysis
4 F.3d 653 · 1993
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently April 2019
5 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 Butz v. Economou · Cleavinger v. Saxner · Brown v. Griesenauer · Hall v. Lombardi · Krueger v. Lyng
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'(a) the need to assure that the individual can perform his [or her] functions without harassment or intimidation; (b) the presence of safeguards that reduce the need for private damages actions as a means of controlling unconstitutional conduct; (c) insulation from political influence; (d) the importance of precedent; (e) the adversary nature of the process; and (f) the correctability of error on appeal.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a 'classic' adjudicatory function so as to entitle [them] to the protection of absolute immunity as opposed to qualified immunity turns on a number of factors.”
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.