Grant v. Farnsworth’s Empirical Analysis
869 F.2d 1149 · 1989
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently September 2017
13 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 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 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988
Relies on Christiansburg Garment Co. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission · Oldham v. Pritchett · Missouri Pacific Railroad Company v. Star City Gravel Co Inc a · Tyler v. Harper · Hladyshewski v. Robinson
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Here Grant [i.e., the protestor] attempted to retry the validity of his arrest, for a crime of which he was convicted in state court. The state court jury decided be yond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty of the crime charged. This necessarily entails that the officers acted lawfully in removing Grant from the parade site, and that his interests in remaining at the parade and in exercising first amendment rights were terminated upon his arrest. Until Grant took a swing at Officer Knock, there had been no wrongful interference with his first amendment rights. After the swing there was no wrongful interference with these rights because he was lawfully arrested. Further, the district court properly determined that because the arrest was proper, any interference with Grant’s first amendment rights was not the proximate cause of his alleged injuries.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Occhino v. Lannon“Under section 1988 a prevailing party defendant may be awarded attorney fees if the defendant proves that the action against him was ‘frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation,’ ”
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.