Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 832 F.2d 123 - Holt v. Castaneda

Holt v. Castaneda’s Empirical Analysis

832 F.2d 123 · 1987

Citation profile

55
cited by 55 later decisions
1
states following
May 2014
most recently cited

31 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently May 2014 · most notably Woodrum v. Woodward County (1989), White v. Frank (1988)

31 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

2401987199020002010decided

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 Imbler v. Pachtman · Hughes v. Rowe · Briscoe v. W · Cleavinger v. Saxner · Mann v. Koob

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

  1. “[i]n adversarial pretrial proceedings as well as at trial, absolute witness immunity is essential if the truth-seeking function of the proceeding is to be fully served.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
    e.g. Williams v. Hepting · Daloia v. Rose
  2. “[t]he immunity of parties and witnesses from subsequent damages liability for their testimony in judicial proceedings was well established in English common law.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
    e.g. 330 F. Supp. 2d 1101 - Matsuura v. EI DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND CO. · Williams v. Hepting
  3. “no principled basis for distinguishing between the [adversarial] pretrial proceedings and the trial on the merits in determining whether absolute immunity should be granted to a police officer witness.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Daloia v. Rose

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.