Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 516 F.3d 290 - Jordan v. Ector County

Jordan v. Ector County’s Empirical Analysis

516 F.3d 290 · 2008

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
2
states following
September 2024
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently September 2024 · most notably Newell v. Runnels (2009), Haverda v. Hays County (2013)

5 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

230200820102020decided

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 Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle · Pickering v. Board of Education of Township High School District 205 Will County Illinois · Connick v. Myers · Elrod v. Burns · Branti v. Finkel

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

  1. “(1) the degree to which the employee’s activity involved a matter of public concern; (2) the time, place, and manner of the employee’s activity; (3) whether close working relationships are essential to fulfilling the employee’s public responsibilities and the potential effect of the employee’s activity on those relationships; (4) whether the employee’s activity may be characterized as hostile, abusive, or insubordinate; and (5) whether . the activity impairs discipline by superiors or harmony among coworkers.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the ruling from which he seeks to appeal, the notice of appeal is liberally construed and a jurisdictional defect will not be found if (1) there is a manifest intent to appeal the unmentioned ruling or (2) failure to designate the order does not mislead or prejudice the other party.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Although the Supreme Court's decisions involve party affiliation, [the Fifth] Circuit has recognized that the Elrod - Branti doctrine [also] applies when an employment decision is based upon support of and loyalty to a particular candidate as distinguished from a political party.”
    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.