Raishevich v. Foster’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988
Relies on Farrar v. Hobby · Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises, Inc. · Texas State Teachers Ass'n v. Garland Independent School District · Rhodes v. Stewart · Rabbi Yitzchok Leblanc-Sternberg v. Robert Fletcher,
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 2 Raishevich brought suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Awards Act of 1976, 42 U.S.C. § 1988, seeking damages for the destruction of his photographic transparencies by Defendant-Appellee Charles Foster (”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“proposed a compromise at $30,000 and asked the attorneys to discuss the proposal with their clients and inform the Court as to their decision.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.