Elam v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Anderson v. Creighton
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[p]rocedural due process must accompany the deprivation of an established property or liberty interest. Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 569 , 92 S.Ct. 2701, 2705 , 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972). The range of protected interests is finite.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co., 455 U.S. 422, 430 , 102 S.Ct. 1148, 1155 , 71 L.Ed.2d 265 (1982); see also Setliff v. Memorial Hosp. of Sheridan County, 850 F.2d 1384, 1395 (10th Cir.1988).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It is a purpose of the ancient institution of property to protect those claims upon which people rely in their daily lives, reliance that must not be arbitrarily undermined.”
2 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.