Kimberlin v. Quinlan’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2510 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2511 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1402
Relies on Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Anderson v. Creighton · Graham v. Connor · Bell v. Wolfish
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.
“does not appear to have turned on the distinction between direct and circumstantial evidence as understood in the law of evidence, but on the question whether the plaintiff had proffered something other than mere conclusions, namely tangible allegations of concrete facts corroborative of [the plaintiff's] own subjective version of the events”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Kimberlin v. Quinlan“be free from governmental interference with their contacts with the press if that interference is based on the content of their speech or proposed speech.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“operates in a neutral fashion, without regard to the content of the expression,”
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.