Baez v. Hennessy’s Empirical Analysis
853 F.2d 73 · 1988
Citation profile
27 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 72 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2019 · most notably Burns v. Reed (1991), Ying Jing Gan v. City of New York (1993)
27 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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
Relies on Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Kentucky v. Graham · Imbler v. Pachtman · Pembaur v. City of Cincinnati · Stump v. Sparkman
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 72 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]hen prosecuting a criminal matter, a district attorney in New York State . . . represents the State, not the county.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the district attorney alone, should decide when and in what manner to prosecute a suspected offender.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It is well established in New York that the district attorney, and the district attorney alone, should decide when and in what manner to prosecute a suspected offender.. .■.. The. State of New York reserves the right to fill vacancies and establish minimum salaries so as to insure that district attorneys’ will be freely independent to act in this impartial manner. 13 No county policy can require them to act otherwise. [A]n elected district attorney’s powers and duties in connection with the prosecution of a criminal proceeding are the same as those of an Assistant Attorney General appointed to handle such a prosecution. 14 A county has no right to establish a policy concerning how either official should prosecute violations of State penal laws. Indeed, it would be a violation of a district attorney’s ethical obligations as counsel for the State in a criminal proceeding to permit himself to be influenced in the performance of his duties by so-called policies of a county...’. Where, as here, controlling law places limits on the County’s authority over the District Attorney, the County cannot be said to be responsible for the conduct at issue. Id. at 77.”
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.