Case v. Eslinger’s Empirical Analysis
555 F.3d 1317 · 2009
Citation profile
16 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 124 later decisions — most recently August 2024 · most notably Brown v. City of Huntsville (2010), Garczynski v. Bradshaw (2009)
16 federal appellate ·
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 Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Illinois v. Gates · Pearson v. Callahan · Parratt v. Taylor
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 124 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Arguable probable cause exists where reasonable officers in the same circumstances and possessing the same knowledge as the Defendant ] could have believed that probable cause existed to arrest. In determining whether arguable probable cause exists, [courts] apply an objective standard, asking whether the officer’s actions are objectively reasonable ... regardless of the officer’s underlying intent or motivation. Arguable probable cause does not require an arresting officer to prove every element of a crime or to obtain a confession before making an arrest, which would negate the concept of probable cause and transform arresting officers into prosecutors.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“a) the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures; b) the right not to be deprived of liberty without due process of law; c) the right not to be deprived of property without due process of law; d) the right to be free from excessive use of force by persons acting under color of state law; e) the right to be free from false arrest; and the right to just compensation for taking of property”. (Doc. 1-1, Count One, p. 5) . The majority of the findings of fact are taken from the Howards' statement of facts and the Court has made its findings by”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“cannot readily complain about the entry of a summary judgment order that did not consider an argument [she] chose not to develop for the district court at the time of the summary judgment motions”) (citation omitted); Resolution Trust Corp. v. Dunmar Corp., 43 F.3d 587, 599 (11th Cir.1995) (”
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.