Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 836 F.2d 96 - Barbera v. Smith

Barbera v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

836 F.2d 96 · 1987

Citation profile

79
cited by 79 later decisions
3
states following
October 2022
most recently cited

25 federal appellate · 9 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 79 later decisions — most recently October 2022 · most notably Ying Jing Gan v. City of New York (1993), Committee of United States Citizens Living in Nicaragua v. Reagan (1988)

25 federal appellate · 9 district · 3 state decisions

26019871990200020102020decided

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. § 1292 · 28 U.S.C. § 1331

Relies on Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Estelle v. Gamble · Mitchell v. Forsyth · 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 79 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “acquiring evidence which might be used in a prosecution.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Prosecutors are entitled to absolute immunity from suits for damages arising from activities that are ‘intimately associated with the judicial phase of the criminal process.’” Barbera v. Smith, 836 F.2d 96, 99 (2d Cir.1987)(citing Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409 , 96 S.Ct. 984 , 47 L.Ed.2d 128 (1976)). Moreover, the FTCA does not authorize claims against federal prosecutors. Bernard, 25 F.3d at 104 -105 (citing Dirienzo v. United States, 690 F.Supp. 1149, 1158, n. 8 (D.Conn.1988)(”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the complaint merely alleges in conclu-sory language that he negligently and recklessly failed to train and supervise [an employee] adequately ... [The com- . plaint does not allege] that [he] created or acquiesced in a policy or practice of poor training and supervision of subordinate Assistant United States Attorneys. Nor does the complaint plead any other facts sufficient to support an inference that [the United States Attorney] was reckless in managing his subordinates.”
    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.