Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 65 F.3d 189 - Moore v. Valder

Moore v. Valder’s Empirical Analysis

65 F.3d 189 · 1995

Citation profile

111
cited by 111 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
3
states following
July 2024
most recently cited

43 federal appellate · 27 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 111 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2024 · most notably Hartman v. Moore (2006), Browning v. Clinton (2002)

43 federal appellate · 27 district · 4 state decisions

6101995200020102020decided

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

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2671 · 28 U.S.C. § 2680 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Imbler v. Pachtman · Butz v. Economou

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

  1. “[i]ntimidating and coercing witnesses into changing their testimony”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “allegation of improper investigatory conduct is inextricably tied to the decision to prosecute and the presentation of evidence,”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “perform[ing] the investigative functions normally performed by a detective or police officer”
    2 later decisions 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.