Nnebe v. Daus’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate ·

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

1. “the summary suspension policy is unconstitutional because taxi drivers lack notice that they will be suspended after they are arrested for specified crimes.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Nnebe v. Daus · Nnebe v. Daus

2. “is the contention that the government must prove more than the fact of a licensee’s arrest before suspending him. As discussed below, however, due process does not require such proof. Moreover, it would be difficult, if not impossible, for the TLC to prove that a driver had actually engaged in the charged criminal conduct without interfering with the criminal investigation. As explained below, federal courts have held both (1) that an agency is entitled to suspend an employee on the basis of pending criminal proceedings against him, and (2) that because an agency may do so, a hearing that does no more than confirm the existence of such criminal proceedings does not violate the suspended employee’s rights.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Nnebe ex rel. Amin v. Daus

3. “determine whether the post-deprivation hearing affords due process because we find that the record on summary judgment does not support the district court's finding (and the City's claim) that the hearing enables a driver to make a showing that 'the charges, even if true, do not demonstrate that the licensee's continued licensure would pose a threat to public health or safety.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Nnebe v. Daus