Parkhurst v. Trapp’s Empirical Analysis
77 F.3d 707 · 1996
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 5 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently October 2025 · most notably Sharrar v. Felsing (1997), Joan Gruenke v. Michael Seip (2000)
13 federal appellate · 5 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))
Relies on Anderson v. Creighton · Payton v. New York · Schmerber v. State of California · Boyd v. United States · Welsh v. Wisconsin
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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An unlawful search never can be justified by its fruits. Many years ago, even without the benefit of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the Bill of Rights, an English court denounced the entry into a man’s home to obtain evidence with these words: “To enter a man’s house by virtue of a nameless warrant, in order to procure evidence, is worse than the Spanish Inquisition; a law under which no Englishman would wish to live an hour; it was a most daring public attack made upon the liberty of the subject.” Huckle v. Money, 95 Eng.Rep. 768, 769 (1763).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Klein v. Madison“To determine reasonableness, a reviewing court must ask 'whether a reasonable person could have believed the defendant's actions to be lawful in light of clearly established law and the information he possessed.'”
1 later decision 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.