Conner v. Reinhard’s Empirical Analysis
847 F.2d 384 · 1988
Citation profile
91 federal appellate · 11 district · 11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 200 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2019 · most notably Hafer v. Melo (1991), Sarsha v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. (1993)
91 federal appellate · 11 district · 11 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 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Anderson v. Creighton · Mitchell v. Forsyth · Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle · Pickering v. Board of Education of Township High School District 205 Will County Illinois
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 200 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“For liability under section 1983, direct participation is not necessary. Any official who “causes” a citizen to be deprived of her constitutional rights can also be held liable. The requisite causal connection is satisfied if the defendant set in motion a series of events that the defendant knew or reasonably should have known would cause others to deprive the plaintiff of her constitutional rights.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a] government official sued in his personal capacity, however, presents a different case.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'The right must be sufficiently particularized to put potential defendants on notice that their conduct probably is unlawful.' ... Our conclusion is that the test for immunity should be whether the law was clear in relation to the specific facts confronting the public official when he acted.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Nowak v. Szwedo · Lenea v. Lane
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.