Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 607 F.3d 583 - Pollard v. Geo Group, Inc.

Pollard v. Geo Group, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

607 F.3d 583 · 2010

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
August 2012
most recently cited

3 federal appellate ·

Appellate journey

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1915A · 28 U.S.C. § 2679 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 717 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 233 (Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009)

Relies on Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Estelle v. Gamble · Farmer v. Brennan · Butz v. Economou · Houston v. Lack

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

  1. ““[T]he decision whether to recognize a Bivens remedy may require two steps. In the first place, there is the question whether any alternative, existing process for protecting the [constitutionally recognized] interest amounts to a convincing reason for the Judicial Branch to refrain from providing a new and freestanding rem­edy in damages. . . . But even in the absence of an al­ternative, a Bivens remedy is a subject of judgment: ‘the federal courts must make the kind of remedial determination that is appropriate for a common-law tribunal, paying particular heed, however, to any special factors counselling hesitation before authorizing a new kind of federal litigation.’ ” 551 U. S., at 550 (quoting Bush v. Lucas, 462 U. S. 367, 378 (1983)).”
    1 later decision 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.