Manual De J. Gomez v. Jerry v. Wilson, Chief of Police’s Empirical Analysis
477 F.2d 411 · 1973
Citation profile
61 federal appellate · 32 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 128 later decisions — most recently October 2017 · most notably United States v. Haldeman (1976), Goland v. Central Intelligence Agency (1978)
61 federal appellate · 32 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 18 U.S.C. § 3501 · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 28 U.S.C. § 2106 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Terry v. Ohio · Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Baker v. Carr · Adams v. Williams · 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 128 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Although the value of certain rights may be difficult of precise measurement, that difficulty does not make the claim non-justiciable under Section 1331(a). . . . Absolute certainty as to the amount is not essential; it suffices that there is a present probability that the damages or the right sought to be protected meet the statutory requirement.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Some courts compute the amount on the basis of the value to the plaintiff of the right he seeks to protect. See, e. g., Glenwood Light & Water Co. v. Mutual Light, Heat & Power Co., 239 U.S. 121 , 126, 36 S.Ct. 30 , 60 L.Ed. 174 (1915). Others look to the pecuniary result to either party which the judgment would produce. See, e. g., Ronzio v. Denver & R. G. W. R.R., 116 F.2d 604 , 606 (10th Cir. 1940). This is the preference of Professor Wright, see C. Wright, Federal Courts § 34, at 119 (2d ed. 1970), and the rule we favor. Tatum v. Laird, supra, 144 U.S.App.D.C. 72 , at 76 & n. 6, 444 F.2d 947 , at 951 & n. 6.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“authority to judicially notice the record in other litigation” before the same court).. 3 . In addition to the filings already identified, the Court considered the following submissions in reaching its decision: (1) the defendants’ Memorandum in Support of Motion to Dismiss (”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Smallwood v. Lynch
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.