Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 75 F.3d 1461 - Pino v. Ep Higgs

Pino v. Ep Higgs’s Empirical Analysis

75 F.3d 1461 · 1996

Citation profile

102
cited by 102 later decisions
2
states following
July 2021
most recently cited

33 federal appellate · 30 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 102 later decisions — most recently July 2021 · most notably Scott v. Hern (2000), Taylor v. Meacham (1996)

33 federal appellate · 30 district · 2 state decisions

4801996200020102020decided

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

Relies on Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co. · Graham v. Connor · Mitchell v. Forsyth · Mapp v. Ohio

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.

  1. ““First, the deprivation must be caused by the exercise of some right or privilege created by the State or by a rule of conduct imposed by the State or by a person for whom the state is responsible. Second, the private party must have acted together with or ... obtained significant aid from state officials or engaged in conduct otherwise chargeable to the State.””
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Applying the well-established legal principle that even a mistaken belief that probable cause exists is a sufficient basis for the courts to grant qualified immunity, and with the boundaries of probable cause being unclear, the judge held that the officers must be protected from suit. 29 Two distinct reasons convince us that the district court erred. First, the meaning of probable cause in the context of a mental health detention is not nearly as ambiguous as the district court would have it. This Court has held that seizure of a person for an emergency mental health evaluation is”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “In the criminal arrest context, a Fourth Amendment seizure is reasonable if it is based on 'probable cause.'”
    3 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.