West v. Love’s Empirical Analysis
776 F.2d 170 · 1985
Citation profile
29 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently August 2008 · most notably Rascon v. Hardiman (1986), Cooper v. Casey (1996)
29 federal appellate · 2 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 Rozier v. Ford Motor Co. · Carson v. Polley · United States v. Medina · United States v. Walus · Lataille v. Ponte
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“trial court's balancing of probative value and unfair prejudice is highly discretionary and its decision on admissibility will be accorded 'great deference.'”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Correctional officers are not required to take excessive personal risks with inmates classified as violent. That defendants were dealing with an inmate housed in the special confinement unit rather than with a trusty housed on a prison farm is clearly relevant to their assessment of the danger posed and the amount of reasonable force to be applied. This evidence bearing on defendants’ state of mind was admissible under rule 404(b).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Young v. Rabideau“). Since evidence that the plaintiff received insurance payments is relevant to the plaintiff's nonpecuniary damages under state law, the Federal Rules of Evidence govern its admissibility. 23 Fed.R.Evid. 403 authorizes the district court to exclude evidence whenever its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.”
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.