Alice Foster and William Allen v. J. Zeeko and Guy Dibello’s Empirical Analysis
540 F.2d 1310 · 1976
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently November 2009 · most notably Moore v. Marketplace Restaurant, Inc. (1985), Askew v. Bloemker (1976)
9 federal appellate · 1 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
Relies on Scheuer v. Rhodes · Younger v. Harris · Monroe v. Pape · Imbler v. Pachtman · Pierson v. Ray
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The test, thus, under § 1983 is not whether the arrest was constitutional or unconstitutional or whether it was made with or without probable cause, but whether the officer believed in good faith that the arrest was made with probable cause and whether that arrest was reasonable. [T]o prevail the police officer need not allege and prove probable cause in the constitutional sense. The standard governing police conduct is composed of two elements, the first is subjective and the second is objective. Thus the officer must allege and prove not only that he believed, in good faith, that his conduct was lawful, but also that his belief was reasonable. (Citation omitted.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he court ‘cannot permit a police officer to avoid liability for damages by pleading ignorance of the law when he unreasonably or in bad faith oversteps the bounds of his authority and invades the constitutional rights of others.... The law does not expect police officers to be sophisticated, constitutional or criminal lawyers, but because they are charged with the responsibility of enforcing the law, it is not unreasonable to expect them to have some knowledge of it.’ [Citing Glasson v. City of Louisville, 518 F.2d 899, 910 (6th Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 930 , 96 S.Ct. 280 , 46 L.Ed.2d 258 (1976)].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Every common, ill-governed or disorderly house, room or other premises, kept for the encouragement of idleness, gaming, drinking, fornication or other misbehavior, is hereby declared to be a public nuisance, and the keeper and all persons connected with the maintenance thereof, and all persons patronizing or frequenting the same, shall be fined not exceeding two hundred dollars for each offense.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. McTavish v. Spiotto
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.