Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 794 F.2d 1129 - Davis v. Robbs

Davis v. Robbs’s Empirical Analysis

794 F.2d 1129 · 1986

Citation profile

70
cited by 70 later decisions
5
states following
March 2003
most recently cited

34 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 70 later decisions — most recently March 2003 · most notably Street v. Jc Bradford & Company (1989), United States v. Hatfield (1987)

34 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 state decisions

400198619902000decided

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 Chimel v. California · Payton v. New York · Parratt v. Taylor · New York v. Belton · Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Weintraub

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. “When a motion for summary judgment is made and supported as provided in this rule, an adverse party may not rest upon the mere allegations or denials of his pleading, but his response, by affidavits or as otherwise provided in this rule, must set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. If he does not so respond, summary judgment, if appropriate, shall be entered against him.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “A § 1983 plaintiff may prevail on his procedural due process claim (1) by demonstrating he is deprived of his liberty as a result of established state procedure which was itself violative of his right to procedural due process; or (2) by proving that the defendants deprived him of a liberty interest pursuant to a “random and unauthorized act” and that available state remedies would not adequately compensate him for the loss that he suffered.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Belton was a case concerning the application of the search incident to arrest exception to the search of an automobile.”
    1 later decision 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.