Sanders v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate ·

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

1. “Rehberg also distinguished officers who, prior to and independent of any grand-jury testimony they might give, “set the wheels of government in motion by instigating a legal action.” Rehberg, 566 U.S. at 371 , 132 S.Ct. 1497 (quoting Wyatt v. Cole, 504 U.S. 158 , 164-65, 112 S.Ct. 1827 , 118 L.Ed.2d 504 (1992)). Rehberg apparently left the door open for at least some § 1983 claims against such officers, whose actions would be entitled only to qualified immunity rather than absolute immunity. Id. at 371-73, 132 S.Ct. 1497 . Because Sanders has not alleged that Jones’s actions rose to the level of “instigating” Sanders’s prosecution, however, we have no occasion to decide whether or how a plaintiff in this circuit would be able to overcome the presumption of probable cause created by a grand-jury indictment in order to bring such a malicious-prosecution claim.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. King v. Harwood

2. “it is well-established in this circuit that an indictment by a grand jury conclusively determines the existence of probable cause unless the defendant-officer 'knowingly or recklessly presented false testimony to the grand jury to obtain the indictment.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Allen v. Rucker

3. “When a police officer claims absolute immunity for his grand jury testimony under Rehberg , the court should determine whether the plaintiff can make out the elements of his § 1983 claim without resorting to the grand jury testimony.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Montoya v. Vigil