Carlson v. Conklin’s Empirical Analysis
813 F.2d 769 · 1987
Citation profile
33 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently August 2014 · most notably Walton v. City of Southfield (1993), Cornelius v. Town of Highland Lake (1989)
33 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions
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 · Scheuer v. Rhodes · Mitchell v. Forsyth · Imbler v. Pachtman
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[w]e need not confine our review, however, to the viability of the qualified immunity defense.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Although the decision to release Thomas [the paroled prisoner] from prison was action by the State, the action of Thomas five months later cannot be fairly characterized as state action. Regardless of whether, as a matter of state tort law, the parole board could be said either to have had a “duty” to avoid harm to his victim or have proximately caused her death, ... we hold that, taking these particular allegations as true, appellees did not “deprive” appellants’ decedent of life within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Fitzpatrick v. State“Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage of any State ... subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Foster v. Walsh
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.