Shifrin v. Wilson’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2013 · most notably Dellums v. Powell (1977), Duchesne v. Sugarman (1977)
8 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 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. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 2281 · 3 U.S.C. § 202 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Scheuer v. Rhodes · Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Monroe v. Pape · Imbler v. Pachtman · Bell v. Hood
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A determination as to good faith involves a determination of a state of mind. "Inasmuch as a determination of someone's state of mind usually entails the drawing of factual inferences as to which reasonable men might differ—a function traditionally left to the jury—summary judgment often will be an inappropriate means of resolving an issue of this character." Similar considerations mitigate against the Court's deciding this issue on the basis of an affidavit and a deposition: "Much depends on the credibility of the witnesses testifying as to their own states of mind. In these circumstances the jury should be given an opportunity to observe the demeanor, during direct and cross-examination, of the witnesses whose states of mind are at issue.11 In short, good faith in general and as a defense in actions for deprivations of civil rights, is almost always a question for determination by the fact-finder rather than the court on a motion for summary judgment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Percival v. Bruun“Inasmuch as a determination of someone's state of mind usually entails the drawing of factual inferences as to which reasonable men might differ—a function traditionally left to the jury—summary judgment often will be an inappropriate means of resolving an issue of this character.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Percival v. Bruun“pose threats to the quality and efficiency of government in the District.”
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.