Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 449 F.3d 709 - Barnes v. Wright

Barnes v. Wright’s Empirical Analysis

449 F.3d 709 · 2006

Citation profile

101
cited by 101 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
November 2024
most recently cited

30 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 101 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2024 · most notably Reichle v. Howards (2012), Reichle v. Howards (2012)

30 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

690200620102020decided

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. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1738 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Mitchell v. Forsyth · Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle · Heck v. Humphrey

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

  1. “appear[ed] to acknowledge that its rule sweeps broadly; the Court noted that causation in retaliatory-prosecution cases is ` usually more complex than it is in other retaliation cases.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “encompasses investigation, prosecution, conviction, and incarceration.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “First, “for officials whose special functions or constitutional status requires complete protection from suit, we have recognized the defense of ‘absolute immunity.’” For example, the Supreme Court has recognized the defense of absolute immunity for legislators performing legislative functions, judges performing judicial functions, prosecutors performing prosecutorial functions, and the President of the United States in his official capacity---- Second, “government officials who perform discretionary functions are generally entitled to qualified immunity and are protected from civil damages so long as ‘their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.’ ””
    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.