Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 538 F.2d 799 - Russ v. Ratliff

Russ v. Ratliff’s Empirical Analysis

538 F.2d 799 · 1976

Citation profile

50
cited by 50 later decisions
February 2013
most recently cited

31 federal appellate · 7 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently February 2013 · most notably McClelland v. Facteau (1979), Putman v. Gerloff (1981)

31 federal appellate · 7 district ·

32019761980199020002010decided

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 Monroe v. Pape · Starnes v. Penrod Drilling Co. · Robert Leon Jenkins, a Minor, by His Mother and Next Friend, Roberta B. Jenkins v. F. W. Averett · Betsy A. Jennings v. Ilus W. Davis · Clifford Griggs v. Firestone Tire and Rubber Company, a Corporation

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

  1. “(1) to consider the evidence in the light most favorable to the . . plaintiffs as the parties prevailing with the jury; (2) to assume that all conflicts in the evidence were resolved ... in favor of the plaintiffs; (3) to assume as proved all facts which plaintiffs’ evidence tends to prove; (4) to give the plaintiffs the benefit of all favorable inferences which may reasonably be drawn from the facts proved; and (5) to deny the motion if, reviewing the evidence in this light, reasonable men could differ as to the conclusions to be drawn from it. 3”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “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 in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress.”
    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.