Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 684 F.2d 422 - Bruner v. Dunaway

Bruner v. Dunaway’s Empirical Analysis

684 F.2d 422 · 1982

Citation profile

152
cited by 152 later decisions
2
states following
April 2024
most recently cited

76 federal appellate · 10 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 152 later decisions — most recently April 2024 · most notably Anderson v. Branen (1994), O'Neill v. Krzeminski (1988)

76 federal appellate · 10 district · 2 state decisions

55019821990200020102020decided

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 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Tennant v. Peoria & Pekin Union Railway Co. · United States v. Southwestern Cable Co. · Thomas Byrd v. William P. Brishke · Putman v. Gerloff

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

  1. “We believe it is clear that one who is given the badge of authority of a police officer may not ignore the duty imposed by his office and fail to stop other officers who summarily punish a third person in his presence or otherwise within his knowledge. That responsibility obviously obtains when the nonfeasor is a supervisory officer to whose direction misfeasor officers are committed. So, too, the same responsibility must exist as to nonsupervisory officers who are present at the scene of such summary punishment, for to hold otherwise would be to insulate nonsupervisory officers from liability for reasonably foreseeable consequences of the neglect of their duty to enforce the laws and preserve the peace.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[c]ourts are not free to reweigh the evidence and set aside the jury verdict merely because the jury could have drawn different inferences or conclusions or because judges feel that other results are more reasonable.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[A] law enforcement officer can be liable under § 1983 when by his inaction he fails to perform a statutorily imposed duty to enforce the laws equally and fairly, and thereby denies equal protection to persons legitimately exercising rights guaranteed them under state or federal law.”
    5 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.