Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 761 F.2d 360 - Smith v. Rowe

Smith v. Rowe’s Empirical Analysis

761 F.2d 360 · 1985

Citation profile

138
cited by 138 later decisions
2
states following
May 2025
most recently cited

55 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 138 later decisions — most recently May 2025 · most notably Brokaw v. Mercer County (2000), Rascon v. Hardiman (1986)

55 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions

68019851990200020102020decided

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. § 1982 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Rizzo v. Goode · Monsanto Company v. Spray-Rite Service Corporation · Grunenthal v. Long Island Rail Road · Jones v. Illinois ex rel. Electoral Board · Wolf-Lillie v. Sonquist

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

  1. “'[a]n official satisfies the personal responsibility requirement of section 1983 ... if the conduct causing the constitutional deprivation occurs at [his] direction or with [his] knowledge and consent.'”
    15 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Damages assessed by a jury are largely discretionary with it . . . . To reverse the judgment of the trial court, the appellate court must conclude that the verdict was so 'gross' or 'monstrously excessive' that the trial court abused its discretion in permitting it to stand.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “affirmative link between the action complained about and the official sued.”
    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.