Bier v. Fleming’s Empirical Analysis
717 F.2d 308 · 1983
Citation profile
32 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 53 later decisions — most recently February 2018 · most notably Wolotsky v. Huhn (1992), Sims v. Jefferson Downs Racing Ass'n (1985)
32 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
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 Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co. · Scheuer v. Rhodes · Butz v. Economou · Lugar v. Edmondson Oil Co.
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 53 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]o be entitled to relief under § 1983, plaintiff must establish that defendant deprived him of a right secured by the Constitution and the laws of the United States and that the deprivation occurred under color of state law. The ultimate issue in determining whether a person is subject to suit under § 1983 is the same question posed in cases arising under the Fourteenth Amendment: is the alleged infringement of federal rights “fairly attributable to the state?” ... The Supreme Court has developed the so-called nexus test to determine whether conduct of a private actor is fairly attributable to a state. Under this test, a finding of state action may be made when “there is a sufficiently close nexus between the State and the challenged action of the regulated entity so that the latter may be fairly treated as that of the State itself.” ... The required nexus may be established by showing that the State has “exercised coercive power or has provided such significant encouragement, either overt or covert, that the choice must in law be deemed to be that of the State.” Also a nexus may be established if the private entity has exercised powers that are “traditionally the exclusive prerogative of the State.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“State officials have a right to qualified immunity for actions taken in their official capacity if they acted in good faith and on the basis of a reasonable belief that their actions were lawful, [citations omitted]... Under the doctrine of qualified, good faith immunity, a government official performing acts within the scope of his official conduct is insulated from damages under § 1983 if (1) at the time and in light of all circumstances there existed reasonable grounds for the belief that the action taken was appropriate and (2) the officer acted in good faith, (citation omitted)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Boals v. Gray“The required nexus must be established by showing that the State has “exercised coercive power or has provided such significant encouragement, either overt, or covert, that the choice must in law be deemed to be that of the State.” ... Also a nexus may be established if the private entity has exercised powers that are “traditionally the exclusive prerogative of the State.””
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.