Mark v. Groff’s Empirical Analysis
521 F.2d 1376 · 1975
Citation profile
55 federal appellate · 6 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 93 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1990 · most notably Butz v. Economou (1978), Usher v. City of Los Angeles (1987)
55 federal appellate · 6 district ·
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 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Relies on Scheuer v. Rhodes · Bell v. Hood · Pierson v. Ray · Tenney v. Brandhove · Barr v. Matteo
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 93 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the scope of discretion and responsibilities of the office and all the circumstances as they reasonably appeared at the time”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Weir v. Muller · Williams v. Wright“[Defendants] offer no significant reason for distinguishing, as far as the immunity doctrine is concerned, between litigation under § 1983 against state officers and actions against federal officers alleging violation of constitutional rights under the general federal question statute. In contrast, the practical advantage of having just one federal immunity doctrine for suits arising under federal law is self-evident. Further, the rights at stake in a suit brought directly under the Bill of Rights are no less worthy of full protection than the constitutional and statutory rights protected by § 1983.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Butz v. Economou · Davis v. Passman“(G)enerally a mere dismissal of a complaint without expressly dismissing the action is not an appealable final order”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Begay v. Corporation
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.