Shockley v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis
823 F.2d 1068 · 1987
Citation profile
55 federal appellate · 6 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 116 later decisions — most recently August 2019 · most notably Capitol Leasing Company v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (1993), Conner v. Reinhard (1988)
55 federal appellate · 6 district · 3 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 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Scheuer v. Rhodes · United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs · Estelle v. Gamble · Kentucky v. Graham · 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 116 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a] suit for damages against a state official in his or her official capacity is a suit against the state for Eleventh Amendment purposes.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A] suit for [money] damages against a state official in his or her individual capacity — meaning that the plaintiff seeks to establish personal liability against the defendant for acts he or she personally committed under color of state law— is not a suit against the state, and thus the Eleventh Amendment is not a bar to recovery.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“we have previously held that if remanding a case dismissed for want of subject matter jurisdiction would be futile because appellant has also failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, we will affirm the district court, even though the dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction was improper.”
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.