Commonwealth v. Corley’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
68 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 69 later decisions — most recently June 2019 · most notably Commonwealth v. White (1995), Commonwealth v. Mason (1985)
68 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 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co. · Wong Sun v. United States · United States v. Leon · Mapp v. Ohio · Coolidge v. New Hampshire
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 69 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Our] cases reflect a two-part approach to the question of “fair attribution.” First, the deprivation must be caused by the exercise of some right or privilege created by the state ... Second, the party charged with the deprivation must be a person who may fairly be said to be a state actor. This may be because ... his conduct is otherwise chargeable to the state.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“First, the deprivation must be caused by the exercise of some right or privilege created by the state[.] Second, the party charged with the deprivation must be a person who may fairly be said to be a state actor. This may be because ... his conduct is otherwise chargeable to the state. There are ... two parts to ... determining whether conduct may be attributed to the state, both of which must be established. The [United States] Supreme Court itself observed that “[a]l- though related these two principles are not the same. They collapse into each other when the claim of a constitutional deprivation is directed against a party whose official character is such as to lend the weight of the state to his decisions .... The two principles diverge when the constitutional claim is directed against a party without such apparent authority, i.e., against a private party.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“in light of all the circumstances of the case, [the private individual] must be regarded as having acted as an 'instrument' or agent of the state.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.