Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 530 F.3d 407 - El Bey v. Roop

El Bey v. Roop’s Empirical Analysis

530 F.3d 407 · 2008

Citation profile

37
cited by 37 later decisions
1
states following
November 2020
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently November 2020 · most notably Hayward v. Cleveland Clinic Foundation (2014), American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky v. Grayson County (2010)

12 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

340200820102020decided

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. § 1746 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Anderson v. Creighton · Haines v. Kerner

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

  1. “First, during a search incident to an arrest occurring inside a home, officers may “as a precautionary matter and without probable cause or reasonable suspicion, look in closets and other spaces immediately adjoining the place of arrest from which an attack could be immediately launched.” Second, officers may conduct a search more pervasive in scope when they have “articulable facts which, taken together with the rational inferences from those facts, would warrant a reasonably prudent officer in believing that the area to be swept harbors an individual posing a danger to those on the arrest scene.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “[a] verified complaint 'carries the same weight as would an affidavit for the purposes of summary judgment.’ ” ACLU of Ky. v. Grayson Cty., Ky., 591 F.3d 837, 844 (6th Cir.2010) (McKeague, J.) (citing, inter alia, El Bey v. Roop, 530 F.3d 407, 414 (6th Cir.2008)) (emphasis added). 18 . See, e.g., SBA v. McDonald, 1985 WL 13600, (6th Cir. Aug. 15, 1985) (p.c.) (”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Thus, entry into a residence pursuant to an arrest warrant is permitted when 'the facts and circumstances within the knowledge of the law enforcement agents, when viewed in the totality, must warrant a reasonable belief that the location to be searched is the suspect's dwelling, and that the suspect is within the residence at the time of entry.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.