Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 502 F.2d 1000 - Phillips v. Trello

Phillips v. Trello’s Empirical Analysis

502 F.2d 1000 · 1974

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
March 2001
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 4 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently March 2001 · most notably Santiago v. City of Philadelphia (1977), 419 F. Supp. 263 - Local No. 1 (aca), Broadcast Employees of The International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters (1976)

7 federal appellate · 4 district ·

2101974198019902000decided

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 Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co. · United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs · New York Times Co. v. Sullivan · Griffin v. Breckenridge · Hagans v. Lavine

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

  1. ““In Griffin v. Breckinridge, 403 U. S. 88 , 91 S.Ct. 1790 , 29 L.Ed.2d 338 (1971), the Supreme Court held that action ‘under color of state law’ is not an element of a § 1985(3) cause of action. That section makes actionable private conspiracies to deprive a citizen of the equal enjoyment of rights secured to all. Griffin v. Breckinridge overruled Collins v. Hardyman, 341 U.S. 651 , 71 S.Ct. 937 , 95 L.Ed. 1253 (1951), which had held that § 1985(3) did not reach the conspiracy alleged because it was private and not under color of state law. Since the plaintiffs in Griffin v. Breckinridge were Negro citizens of Mississippi and charged harassment on racial grounds, the Court expressly reserved the question of whether a conspiracy motivated by invidiously discriminatory intent other than racial bias would be actionable under § 1985(3). 403 U.S. at 102, n. 9 , 91 S.Ct. 1790 . Since then, the task of defining the scope of the private conspiracy cause of action under § 1985(3) has been going forward in the lower federal courts. [citations omitted] Section 1985(3) was enacted as a part of the Civil Rights Act of 1871 and thus draws vitality from the fourteenth amendment as well as the thirteenth.” Id. 502 F.2d at 1004 . (emphasis added)”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““They contend . . . that since they are citizens holding no official capacity, they cannot be regarded as having acted ‘under color of’ state law. But the law has long been settled that when two or more persons conspire to violate the civil rights of another, if one or more of the conspirators is a state officer acting under color of state law, then the mere fact that other conspirators are not state officers is no defense to them in a suit under the Civil Rights Act. E. g., Adickes v. Kress & Co., 398 U.S. 144, 152 [ 90 S.Ct. 1598 , 26 L.Ed.2d 142 ] (1970); [further citations omitted].” 502 F.2d at 1004 .”
    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.