Eubanks v. Gerwen’s Empirical Analysis
40 F.3d 1157 · 1994
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 70 later decisions — most recently June 2019 · most notably Pinaud v. County of Suffolk (1995), Feliciano v. City of Miami Beach (2013)
23 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1367 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs · Carnegie-Mellon University v. Cohill · Albright v. Oliver · Rosenberg v. Comerica Bank · Austin Products Co. v. Workers' Compensation Insurers Rating Association of Minnesota
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 70 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Defendants] did not make the decision as to whether or not to prosecute Eubanks; nor did they act in such a way as improperly to influence the decision by the State Attorney in that regard.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The evidence in the record reveals that none of the defendants had anything to do with the decision whether or not to prosecute Eubanks. Thus the defendants herein are not proper targets of such a claim. In the within case, if the entire sequence of events, including those relevant to the arrest, is examined, it becomes clear that none of the defendants were responsible for the decision to prosecute, and that none of them improperly influenced the decision to prosecute. They did fully apprise the State Attorney of all relevant information known to them, including that which weighed for and against Eubanks’ guilt.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“federal claims [had] been disposed of rather early on at the summary judgment phase[,]...comity suggests that the remaining state law malicious prosecution claim should be heard in state court”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.