Woolfolk v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
81 F.3d 741 · 1996
Citation profile
13 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently July 2017
13 federal appellate ·
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
Relies on Tennessee v. Garner · Johnson v. Jones · Behrens v. Pelletier · Swint v. Chambers County Commission · Kincade v. City of Blue Springs
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“this is the type of fact-based qualified immunity decision that is not appropriate for interlocutory appeal”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Dorothy C. Elliott, Individually and as Co-Personal Representative of the Estate of Archie Elliott, III Archie Elliott, Jr., Individually and as Co-Personal Representative of the Estate of Archie Elliott, III v. Jason Leavitt, Police Officer for District Heights, Md, and Prince George's County, Maryland David B. Mitchell, Prince George's County Police Chief Wayne Cheney, Police Officer City of District Heights, Md Michael Conboy, Police Chief for District Heights, Md, Dorothy C. Elliott, Individually and as Co-Personal Representative of the Estate of Archie Elliott, III Archie Elliott, Jr., Individually and as Co-Personal Representative of the Estate of Archie Elliott, III v. Wayne Cheney, Police Officer, and Jason Leavitt, Police Officer for District Heights, Md Prince George's County, Maryland David B. Mitchell, Prince George's County Police Chief City of District Heights, Md Michael Conboy, Police Chief for District Heights, Md · Elliott III“[I]f the suspect threatens the officer with a weapon or there is probable cause to believe that he has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm, deadly force may be used if necessary to prevent escape, and if, where feasible, some warning has been given.”
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.