Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 798 F.2d 1313 - Wren v. Spurlock

Wren v. Spurlock’s Empirical Analysis

798 F.2d 1313 · 1986

Citation profile

112
cited by 112 later decisions
4
states following
June 2017
most recently cited

62 federal appellate · 12 district · 10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 112 later decisions — most recently June 2017 · most notably Conaway v. Smith (1988), Melton v. City of Oklahoma City (1989)

62 federal appellate · 12 district · 10 state decisions

5001986199020002010decided

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 Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle · Pickering v. Board of Education of Township High School District 205 Will County Illinois · Connick v. Myers · United States v. Young · Smith v. Wade

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 112 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “unless the employer shows that some restriction is necessary to prevent the disruption of official functions or to insure effective performance by the employee.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “whether the evidence is sufficient to create an issue for the jury,”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[T]he plaintiff in a retaliation case ... must show that (1) the speech was constitutionally protected, i.e., the speech related to matters of public concern and the speaker's rights outweighed the state's right to control its employees, and (2) the speech was a substantial or the motivating factor in the state's detrimental action.”
    2 later decisions 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.