Teneyuca v. Bexar County’s Empirical Analysis
767 F.2d 148 · 1985
Citation profile
21 federal appellate · 3 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 70 later decisions — most recently August 2021 · most notably Clark v. Tarrant County (1986), Goldsmith v. City of Atmore (1993)
21 federal appellate · 3 district · 4 state decisions
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. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 706 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Hannahville Indian Community v. United States · Bowe v. Colgate-Palmolive Co. · Galindo v. Precision American Corp. · Anderson v. City of Albuquerque · Owens v. Rush
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 70 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) whether the elected official has plenary powers of appointment and removal, (2) whether the person in the position at issue is personally accountable to only that elected official, (3) whether the person in the position at issue represents the elected official in the eyes of the public, (4) whether the elected official exercises a considerable amount of control over the position, (5) the level of the position within the organization’s chain of command, and (6) the actual intimacy of the working relationship between the elected official and the person filling the position.”
30 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The exemption [for personal staff] set forth in the preceding sentence shall not include employees subject to the civil service laws of a State government, governmental agency, or political subdivision.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“that the highly factual nature of the inquiry necessary to the determination of the 'personal staff' exemption does not lend itself well to disposition by summary judgment.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Russell Nichols Robert Campbell Jim Walters Hayden Byrd Carl Miller Loyd McBee Blake Dudoit v. Charles Hurley, as Sheriff of Leflore County, Oklahoma the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Leflore, State of Oklahoma, and the Excise Board of Leflore County, Oklahoma, and the Secretary of Labor, Amicus Curiae. Al Cossey Alvin McGee Jim Lawson v. Bobby Gray, Sheriff of McIntosh County, State of Oklahoma Board of County Commissioners of McIntosh County, State of Oklahoma, the Secretary of Labor, Amicus Curiae · 851 F. Supp. 793 - Rutland v. Office of Atty. Gen., State of Miss.
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.