Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 50 F.3d 61 - Lowinger v. Broderick

Lowinger v. Broderick’s Empirical Analysis

50 F.3d 61 · 1995

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
June 2018
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 8 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently June 2018

3 federal appellate · 8 district ·

80199520002010decided

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 Anderson v. Creighton · Mitchell v. Forsyth · Hunter v. Bryant · Febus-Rodriguez v. Betancourt-Lebron · Rogers v. Fair

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

  1. “[T]he analysis employed to determine whether an official is entitled to summary judgment is quite generous. A reasonable, although mistaken, conclusion about the lawfulness of one’s conduct does not subject a government official to personal lia-bility_ [T]he qualified immunity standard gives ample room for mistaken judgments by protecting all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “'The qualified immunity standard gives ample room for mistaken judgments by protecting all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[E]ven erroneous decisions by officials may be entitled to qualified immunity.”
    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.