Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 481 F.3d 520 - Boyd v. Owen

Boyd v. Owen’s Empirical Analysis

481 F.3d 520 · 2007

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
1
states following
September 2024
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently September 2024 · most notably Estate of Escobedo v. Bender (2010), Mann v. Vogel (2013)

12 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

200200720102020decided

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

Relies on Mathews v. Eldridge · Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill · Duncan v. Walker · SAUCIER v. KATZ Et Al. · Johnson v. Jones

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

  1. “'have no weight as precedents and therefore cannot clearly establish a constitutional right.'”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[Identification of the specific dictates of due process generally requires consideration of three distinct factors: first, the private interest that will be affected by the official action; second, the risk of an erroneous deprivation of such interest through the procedures used, and the probable value, if any, of additional or substitute procedural safeguards; and, finally, the government’s interest, including the function involved and the fiscal and administrative burdens that the additional or substitute procedural requirement would entail.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “For a constitutional right to be clearly established, its contours 'must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right'; however, an official action is not protected by qualified immunity only when the very action in question has previously been held unlawful, rather the unlawfulness must be apparent 'in light of the pre-existing law.'”
    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.