Blue v. Koren’s Empirical Analysis
72 F.3d 1075 · 1995
Citation profile
34 federal appellate · 11 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 102 later decisions — most recently February 2019 · most notably Curley v. Village of Suffern (2001), Joseph Locurto v. Howard Safir Commissioner of the New York City (2001)
34 federal appellate · 11 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. § 1395I (§ 1817 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1395I (§ 1819 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Graham v. Connor · Mitchell v. Forsyth · Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle
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 102 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“particularized evidence of direct or circumstantial facts”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[U]pon a motion for summary judgment asserting a qualified immunity defense in an action where an official’s conduct is objectively reasonable but an unconstitutional subjective intent is alleged, the plaintiff must proffer particularized evidence of direct or circumstantial facts, supporting the claim of an improper motive in order to avoid summary judgment.... In our view, the particularized evidence of improper motive may include expressions by the officials involved regarding their state of mind, circumstances suggesting in a substantial fashion that the plaintiff has been singled out, or the highly unusual nature of the actions taken.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“If the conduct [at issue] was objectively reasonable, a conclusory proffer of an unconstitutional motive should not defeat the motion for summary judgment. The reasonableness of the conduct is itself substantial evidence in support of the motion and requires in response a particularized proffer of evidence of unconstitutional motive. Otherwise, the qualified immunity defense would be hollow indeed.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. ESTATE OF ROSENBAUM BY PLOTKIN v. City of New York · Duamutef v. Hollins
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.