Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 813 F.2d 1509 - Velasquez v. Senko

Velasquez v. Senko’s Empirical Analysis

813 F.2d 1509 · 1987

Citation profile

39
cited by 39 later decisions
August 2001
most recently cited

28 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently August 2001 · most notably Armendariz v. Penman (1996), Joseph Locurto v. Howard Safir Commissioner of the New York City (2001)

28 federal appellate · 1 district ·

230198719902000decided

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

Relies on Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Mitchell v. Forsyth · Abney v. United States · Kennedy v. City of Cleveland

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

  1. “involves a legal issue 'conceptually distinct' from the merits of [a] plaintiff's claim.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “claim that the law they [were] accused of violating was not clearly established, [i]nstead, they present[ed] a disputed factual issue, inextricably bound up in the underlying claim ...”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[A] district court's denial of a claim of qualified immunity, to the extent that it turns on an issue of law, is an appealable 'final decision' within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1291....”
    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.