Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 438 F.3d 1036 - Moore v. Guthrie

Moore v. Guthrie’s Empirical Analysis

438 F.3d 1036 · 2006

Citation profile

167
cited by 167 later decisions
2
states following
February 2024
most recently cited

28 federal appellate · 106 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 167 later decisions — most recently February 2024 · most notably Smith v. United States (2009), Brown v. Montoya (2011)

28 federal appellate · 106 district · 2 state decisions

1150200620102020decided

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 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Roe v. Wade · Daniels v. Williams · Hudson v. Palmer · County of Sacramento v. Lewis

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

  1. “Establishing these limits advances “three basic principles highlighted by the Supreme Court in evaluating substantive due process claims: (1) the need for restraint in defining their scope; (2) the concern that § 1983 not replace state tort law; and (3) the need for deference to local policymaking bodies in making decisions impacting upon public safety.””
    14 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “"a plaintiff must do more than show that the government actor intentionally or recklessly caused injury to the plaintiff by abusing or misusing government power. The plaintiff must demonstrate a degree of outrageousness and a magnitude of potential or actual harm that is truly conscience shocking. This is a high level of outra geousness."”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[t]he ultimate standard for determining whether there has been a substantive due process violation is whether the challenged government action shocks the conscience of federal judges”
    4 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.