Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 843 F.2d 1320 - Hammond v. Bales

Hammond v. Bales’s Empirical Analysis

843 F.2d 1320 · 1988

Citation profile

41
cited by 41 later decisions
1
states following
August 2009
most recently cited

22 federal appellate · 9 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently August 2009 · most notably Pfeiffer v. Hartford Fire Insurance (1991), United States v. Staggs (1989)

22 federal appellate · 9 district · 1 state decisions

280198819902000decided

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 Imbler v. Pachtman · California State Board of Equalization v. Western Marina Corp. · Poland v. Arizona · ITT Continental Baking Co. v. William Inglis & Sons Baking Co. · Sea-Land Service, Inc. v. Federal Maritime Commission

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

  1. “[w]hen a plaintiff in a § 1983 action attempts to assert the necessary “state action” by implicating a state official in a conspiracy with private defendants, the pleadings must specifically present facts showing agreement and concerted action. Conclusory allegations without supporting facts are insufficient.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “intimately associated with the judicial phase of the criminal process.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[t]he plaintiff must demonstrate 'the existence of a significant nexus or entanglement between the absolutely immune State official and the private party in relation to the steps taken by each to fulfill the objects of their conspiracy.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.