Vega v. Lantz’s Empirical Analysis
596 F.3d 77 · 2010
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2246 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Paul v. Davis · Sandin v. Conner · Siegert v. Gilley · Vitek v. Jones
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the utterance of a statement sufficiently derogatory to injure his or her reputation, that is capable of being proved false, and that he or she claims is false, and (2) a material state-imposed burden or state-imposed alteration of the plaintiff's status or rights.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a stigmatizing statement plus a deprivation of a tangible interest.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The gravamen of 'stigma' as part of a due process violation is the making under color of law of a reputation-tarnishing statement that is false.”
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.