McDermott v. Royal’s Empirical Analysis
613 F.3d 1192 · 2010
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Broadrick v. Oklahoma · City of Houston v. Hill · Payne v. Pauley · Metaullics Systems Co. v. Cooper · Foster v. Metropolitan Airports Commission
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“While Hill did invalidate a statute prohibiting a person from "... in any manner oppos[ing], molest[ing], abus[ing] or interrupt[ing] any policeman in the execution of his duty, ...," the court focused on the "interrupt" element of the crime, not the "in any manner" portion which shares similarity with the "in any way" part of the statute here. That the law prohibited interruption meant that the law prohibited speech, as interruption suggested verbal interruption. The ordinance here prohibits "resist[ing]," "interfer[ing]" and "hinder[ing]," none of which suggest speech, and on the contrary, suggest some kind of physical interference.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“applied only to physical acts substantially frustrating or hindering an officer's performance of his duties); McDermott v. Royal , 613 F.3d 1192 , 1194 (8th Cir. 2010) (holding that”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“cover[s] only physical acts or fighting words”
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.