Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 74 F.3d 578 - Bennett v. Pippin

Bennett v. Pippin’s Empirical Analysis

74 F.3d 578 · 1996

Citation profile

79
cited by 79 later decisions
5
states following
November 2023
most recently cited

26 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 79 later decisions — most recently November 2023 · most notably Roe v. City of Waterbury (2008), Cozzo v. Tangipahoa Parish Council-President Government (2002)

26 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 state decisions

4001996200020102020decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 655 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Pembaur v. City of Cincinnati · Leatherman v. Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence and Coordination Unit · City of St. Louis v. Praprotnik

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

  1. “a single decision may create municipal liability if that decision were made by a final policymaker responsible for that activity,”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““The reinstatement order was functionally identical to a denial of a motion to dismiss, and this effective refusal to grant a 12(b)(6) dismissal was followed by a final judgement after a trial on the merits. After a trial on the merits, the sufficiency of the allegations in the complaint is irrelevant. A district court must deny a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) unless the complaint fails to state any set of facts upon which relief could be granted. Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-47 , 78 S.Ct. 99, 101-103 , 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957). Rule 12(b)(6) measures the sufficiency of the plaintiffs allegations. When the plaintiff has prevailed after a full trial on the merits, a district court’s denial of a Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal becomes moot.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “mildly aroused by the way in which [the victim] touched him as he lit a cigarette for her.” Id. Later, after the victim had been fingerprinted, photographed, and given Miranda warnings by deputies, and then returned to her house, the sheriff visited her at her house. Id. He made the visit because he wanted to assuage the victim’s concern that her husband’s friends would attack her and because of the earlier titillation. Id. After some initial conversation, the sheriff-perpetrator forced himself on the victim, telling her”
    1 later decision 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.