670 F. Supp. 255 - Delaney v. Carmichael’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

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

1. “the fact that the Code expressly requires that reserve police officers only be appointed — but not removed — by the same authority as regular police officers (see I.C. § 36-8-3-20), combined with the fact that § 36-8-10-11 [a section similar to Ind.Code § 36-8-3-4, requiring cause for termination of county police officers and establishing a review procedure from the decision of a merit board to terminate an officer] refers only to “county police officer” and not to “police reserves” “implies” that the state legislature had every intention of excluding reserve police officers from the procedural protections of I.C. § 36-8-10-11.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Kennedy v. McCarty

2. “[t]he threshold question under any Fourteenth Amendment due process claim ... is whether the plaintiff has been deprived of a cognizable life, liberty, or property interest. See Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564 [ 92 S.Ct. 2701 , 33 L.Ed.2d 548 ] (1972). [The plaintiff] makes no life or liberty claims, so the question before the court is whether the plaintiff had any protectible property interest in his job.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 684 F. Supp. 1465 - Shannon v. Bepko