Thomas v. Booker’s Empirical Analysis
762 F.2d 654 · 1985
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Bell v. Wolfish · Smith v. Wade · Putman v. Gerloff · Martin v. White · Wade v. Haynes
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“does not appear in Instruction No. 7. While the trial court might artfully have updated the language of its instruction to reflect the relevant statements of law made by this Court, we find that the failure to do so was, at worst, harmless error. By including in Instruction No. 7 the words”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Thomas v. Booker“knew or should have known of a specific, clear and present danger to the safety of [Thomas], a danger manifested by evidence of objective facts and circumstances which should have led [them], in the exercise of professional judgment, to act in certain ways.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Thomas v. Booker“could reasonably infer that the jury meant only to award damages against Booker and when told their verdict was incomplete, they simply redistributed their original award....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Thomas v. Booker
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.