Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 443 So. 2d 1232 - Davis v. Everett

443 So. 2d 1232 - Davis v. Everett’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
4
states following
October 2012
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently October 2012

12 state decisions

601983199020002010decided

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)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988

Relies on United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs · Hutto v. Finney · Maine v. Thiboutot · Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises, Inc. · Maher v. Gagne

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

  1. “"In any action or proceeding to enforce a provision of sections 1981, 1982, 1983, 1985, and 1986 of this title, title IX of Public Law 92-318, or title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the court, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party, other than the United States, a reasonable attorney’s fee as part of the costs."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “attorney's fees are available in cases `in which plaintiff prevails on a wholly statutory, non-civil-rights claim pendent to a substantial constitutional claim.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. ““Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.