Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 624 F.2d 612 - Downing v. Williams

Downing v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

624 F.2d 612 · 1980

Citation profile

57
cited by 57 later decisions
2
states following
August 2022
most recently cited

28 federal appellate · 4 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently August 2022 · most notably Duckworth v. Franzen (1985), Beardsley v. Webb (1994)

28 federal appellate · 4 district · 2 state decisions

42019801990200020102020decided

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 Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Morrissey v. Brewer · Wolff v. McDonnell · Ex Parte: Edward T Young · Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle

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

  1. “when a teacher who is to be terminated for cause opposed his termination ...; (a) he [must] be advised of the cause or causes for his termination in sufficient detail to fairly enable him to show any error that may exist, (b) he [must] be advised of the names and the nature of the testimony of witnesses against him, (c) at a reasonable time after such advice he must be accorded a meaningful opportunity to be heard in his own defense, (d) that hearing should be before a tribunal that both possesses some academic expertise and has an apparent impartiality toward the charges.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Where a governmental employer chooses to postpone the opportunity of a nonprobationary employee to secure a full-evidentiary hearing until after dismissal, risk reducing procedures must be accorded. These must include, prior to termination, written notice of the reasons for termination and an effective opportunity to rebut those reasons. Effective rebuttal must give the employee the right to respond in writing to the charges made and to respond orally before the official charged with the responsibility of making the termination decision.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “It is clear that the existence of a legitimate property or liberty interest is a prerequisite to the examination of any claimed threat of due process. Perry v. Sindermann, 408 U.S. 593 , 92 S.Ct. 2694 , 33 L.Ed.2d 560 (1972); Goss v. Lopez, 419 U.S. 565 , 95 S.Ct. 729 , 42 L.Ed.2d 725 (1975); Thurston v. Dekle, 531 F.2d 1264, 1271 (5th Cir. 1976), vacated on other grounds 438 U.S. 901 , 98 S.Ct. 3118 , 57 L.Ed.2d 1144 (1978).”
    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.