Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 8 F.3d 214 - Pete v. Metcalfe

Pete v. Metcalfe’s Empirical Analysis

8 F.3d 214 · 1993

Citation profile

51
cited by 51 later decisions
2
states following
November 2017
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently November 2017 · most notably Piotrowski v. City of Houston (2001), Campbell v. City of San Antonio (1995)

13 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

250199320002010decided

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 Haines v. Kerner · Dennis v. Sparks · Alabama v. Pugh · Bowsher v. Merck & Co. · Sullivan v. United States

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

  1. “(1) [A] criminal action was commenced against the plaintiff; (2) the prosecution was caused by the defendant or with his aid; (3) the action terminated in plaintiffs favor; (4) the plaintiff was innocent; (5) the defendant acted without probable cause; (6) the defendant acted with malice; and (7) the criminal proceeding damaged the plaintiff.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “This is true where an arrest is pursuant to a validly issued arrest warrant, and must also be true where, as here, Pete's two-year imprisonment was the result of a judgment of conviction by a court with jurisdiction over him.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “where the detention was executed by virtue of legally sufficient process duly issued by a court of competent jurisdiction.”
    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.