Wilson v. Thompson’s Empirical Analysis
593 F.2d 1375 · 1979
Citation profile
70 federal appellate · 9 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 165 later decisions — most recently May 2025 · most notably Amstar Corporation v. Domino's Pizza Inc (1980), Haynesworth v. Miller (1987)
70 federal appellate · 9 district · 5 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
Relies on Younger v. Harris · Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle · Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp. · Washington v. Davis · National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. Y Button
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 165 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the plaintiff establishes that the conduct allegedly retaliated against or sought to be deterred was constitutionally protected, and that the state's bringing of the criminal prosecution was motivated, at least in part, by a purpose to retaliate for or to deter that conduct; and (2) the state fails to show by a preponderance of the evidence that it would have decided to prosecute even had the impermissible purpose not been considered.”
12 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Moore v. Hartman · Thomas v. State“a state prosecution undertaken in retaliation for or to deter the exercise of constitutionally protected rights,”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Fussell v. Price · In Re Fussell“rule of Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a) applies to a trial judge's findings of fact whether he prepared them or they were developed by one of the parties and mechanically adopted by the judge,”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.