Riggins v. Goodman’s Empirical Analysis
572 F.3d 1101 · 2009
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 44 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 91 later decisions — most recently February 2025 · most notably Thomson v. Salt Lake County (2009), Estate of Booker v. Gomez (2014)
20 federal appellate · 44 district · 1 state decisions
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 Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill · Pearson v. Callahan · Scott v. Harris · Boddie v. Connecticut
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 91 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“should be permitted to exercise their sound discretion in deciding which of the two prongs of the qualified immunity analysis should be addressed first in light of the circumstances of the particular case at hand.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““An essential principle of due process is that a deprivation of life, liberty or property ‘be preceded by notice and opportunity for hearing appropriate to the nature of the case.’ ” Cleveland Bd. of Educ. v. Loudermill, 470 U.S. 532, 542 , 105 S.Ct. 1487 , 84 L.Ed.2d 494 (1985) (citation omitted). The Supreme Court has described “the root requirement” of the Due Process Clause as being “that an individual be given an opportunity for a hearing before he is deprived of any significant property interest.” Id. (citing Boddie v. Connecticut, 401 U.S. 371, 379 , 91 S.Ct. 780 , 28 L.Ed.2d 113 (1971) (emphasis in original)). “This principle requires ‘some kind of a hearing’ prior to the discharge of an employee who has a constitutionally protected property in terest in his employment.” Id. (citation omitted).”
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.