Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 585 U.S. 87 - Lozman v. Riviera Beach

Lozman v. Riviera Beach’s Empirical Analysis

2018

Citation profile

71
cited by 71 later decisions
6
cited 6 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
April 2025
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 71 later decisions (6 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2025 · most notably Department Of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam (2020), Waters v. Madson (2019)

10 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions

46020182020decided

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 Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle · Heck v. Humphrey · Connick v. Myers · Pembaur v. City of Cincinnati

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

  1. “[i]f the plaintiff proves the absence of probable cause, then the Mt. Healthy [City School Dist. Bd. of Educ. v. Doyle , 429 U.S. 274 , 97 S.Ct. 568 , 50 L.Ed.2d 471 (1977) ] test governs: The plaintiff must show that the retaliation was a substantial or motivating factor behind the [arrest], and, if that showing is made, the defendant can prevail only by showing that the [arrest] would have been initiated without respect to retaliation.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “an unyielding requirement to show the absence of probable cause could pose a risk that some police officers may exploit the arrest power as a means of suppressing speech.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “prove the existence and enforcement of an official policy motivated by retaliation”
    3 later decisions 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.