Bailey v. Kirk’s Empirical Analysis
777 F.2d 567 · 1985
Citation profile
51 federal appellate · 14 district · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 89 later decisions — most recently July 2017 · most notably Woodward v. City of Worland (1992), Phillips v. Calhoun (1992)
51 federal appellate · 14 district · 10 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 Mathews v. Eldridge · Morrissey v. Brewer · Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill · Connick v. Myers · Paul v. Davis
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 89 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“if a plaintiff establishes that he had a protected property or liberty interest of which he was deprived without a due process hearing, his claim that he was forced to resign or was constructively discharged from employment may be actionable under § 1983.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In light of (subsequent holdings), it is settled that the 'bitter with the sweet' approach misconceives the constitutional guarantee. If a clearer holding is needed, we provide it today. The point is straightforward; the Due Process Clause provided that certain substantive rights--life, liberty and property--cannot be deprived except pursuant to constitutionally adequate procedures.... "Property”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“that a public employee, who could not be suspended except for cause, had a property interest in continued employment, even though the city's suspension provisions may not provide for a right of appeal.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.