Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 801 F.2d 789 - Jacquez v. Procunier

Jacquez v. Procunier’s Empirical Analysis

801 F.2d 789 · 1986

Citation profile

224
cited by 224 later decisions
2
states following
April 2025
most recently cited

81 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 224 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably Jones v. Ml Greninger (1999), Schultea v. Wood (1995)

81 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

74019861990200020102020decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Harlow v. Fitzgerald · United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs · Mitchell v. Forsyth · Daniels v. Williams

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

  1. “if the protections afforded public officials are not to ring hollow, plaintiffs cannot be allowed to continue to amend or supplement their pleading until they stumble upon a formula that carries them over the threshold. Such a protracted process is likely to disrupt public officials from their duties.... At some point a court must decide that a plaintiff has had a fair opportunity to make his case; if, after that time, a cause has not been established, the court should finally dismiss the suit.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Indeed, Harlow emphasizes that even such pretrial matters as discovery are to be avoided if possible, as '[i]nquiries of this kind can be peculiarily disruptive of effective government.' ... Unless the plaintiff's allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “"Unless we have searched every nook and cranny of the record, like a hungry beggar searching a pantry for the last morsel of food, and have determined that ‘even the most sympathetic reading of plaintiffs pleadings uncovers no theory and no facts that would subject the present defendants to liability,’ we must remand to permit plaintiff to amend his claim if he can do so.””
    3 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.