Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 542 F.3d 545 - Woodruff v. Mason

Woodruff v. Mason’s Empirical Analysis

542 F.3d 545 · 2008

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
January 2021
most recently cited

11 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently January 2021 · most notably Bridges v. Gilbert (2009), Gomez v. Randle (2012)

11 federal appellate ·

240200820102020decided

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. § 1396A (§ 1902 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 704 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)

Relies on Hudson v. Palmer · Bounds v. Smith · National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. Y Button · Village of Willowbrook v. Olech · California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited

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

  1. “(1) it engaged in activity protected by the First Amendment, (2) it suffered a deprivation that would likely deter First Amendment activity in the future, and (3) the First Amendment activity was “at least a motivating factor” in the [Government’s] decision to take the retaliatory action.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “must show 'a causal link between the protected act and the alleged retaliation.'”
    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.