Novoselsky v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis
822 F.3d 342 · 2016
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 28 U.S.C. § 1367 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Erie Co v. Tompkins · Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Mitchell v. Forsyth · New York Times Co. v. Sullivan
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) he engaged in activity protected by the First Amendment; (2) he suffered a deprivation that would likely deter First Amendment activity in the future; and (3) the First Amendment activity was at least a motivating factor in the defendant's decision to take the retaliatory action.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Black v. Clarke“only in situations of threat, coercion, or intimidation that punishment, sanction, or adverse regulatory action will immediately follow.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Black v. Clarke“But this is a high bar, usually limited to the release of highly personal and extremely humiliating details to the public.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Black v. Clarke
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.