Davis v. Richmond’s Empirical Analysis
512 F.2d 201 · 1975
Citation profile
16 federal appellate · 8 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 1990 · most notably Flagg Brothers Inc v. Brooks J Lefkowitz (1978), Parks v. Mr. Ford (1977)
16 federal appellate · 8 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 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Fuentes v. Shevin · Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co. · Burton v. Wilmington Parking Authority · Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp. of Bay View · Moose Lodge No. 107 v. Irvis
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'whether a particular class of creditor did or did not enjoy the same freedom to act in Elizabethan or Georgian England.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * As in Fletcher, the lien attaches to property within a creditor’s ready grasp under circumstances where self-help seems an obvious and not surprising course. The fact that defendants’ conduct was permitted and regulated by state law — as much private conduct is— does not by itself make the conduct’s connection with the state sufficiently close so that the private conduct ‘may be fairly treated as that of the State itself.’ ” (Emphasis ours)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hitchcock v. Allison“Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured ...”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.