Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 560 F.3d 1 - Bergeron v. Cabral

Bergeron v. Cabral’s Empirical Analysis

560 F.3d 1 · 2009

Citation profile

57
cited by 57 later decisions
1
states following
February 2025
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 34 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently February 2025 · most notably Maldonado v. Fontanes (2009), Rodríguez-García v. Miranda-Marín (2010)

14 federal appellate · 34 district · 1 state decisions

410200920102020decided

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)) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 703 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)

Relies on Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Anderson v. Creighton · Mitchell v. Forsyth · Pearson v. Callahan · Elrod v. Burns

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

  1. “We use a three-part test to determine whether an official is entitled to qualified immunity, following the guidance provided by the Supreme Court. The threshold inquiry is whether the plaintiffs allegations, if true, establish a constitutional violation. The second question is whether the right was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation. That inquiry is necessary because officers should be on notice that their conduct is unlawful before they are subject to suit. The third is whether a reasonable officer, similarly situated, would understand that the challenged conduct violated that established right.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The term 'adverse employment action' arose in the Title VII context as a shorthand for the statutory requirement that a plaintiff show an alteration in the material terms or conditions of his employment.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[T]he 'adverse employment action' inquiry in the section 1983 context focuses on whether an employer's acts, viewed objectively, place substantial pressure on the employee's political views.”
    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.