Blaylock v. Schwinden’s Empirical Analysis
856 F.2d 107 · 1988
Citation profile
4 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Scheuer v. Rhodes · Edelman v. Jordan · Parratt v. Taylor · Daniels v. Williams · Papasan v. Allain
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“on state officials are not barred by the eleventh amendment. Id. at 238, 94 S.Ct. at 1687. 3 While damage actions brought under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 are generally viewed as suits against the individual, the plaintiffs in this case expressly sued the defendants both as individuals and as state representatives in their official capacities. Moreover, plaintiffs were clearly seeking damages from the public treasury. In their complaint, plaintiffs demanded that”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he availability of a tort suit, for defendants' random, unanticipated acts,”
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.