Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 470 F.3d 65 - Peay v. Ajello

Peay v. Ajello’s Empirical Analysis

470 F.3d 65 · 2006

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
1
states following
May 2019
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

Relationships

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

Relies on Haines v. Kerner · Heck v. Humphrey · Imbler v. Pachtman · United States v. Cronic · Satterwhite v. Texas

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

  1. “The sole purpose [of a presentence investigation] is to enable the court, within limits fixed by statute, to impose an appropriate penalty, fitting the offender as well as the crime.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “entitled to absolute immunity in suits for damages arising out of their preparation and submission of presentence reports”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “a probation officer acts as an arm of the court”
    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.