Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 877 F.2d 469 - Miller v. Taylor

Miller v. Taylor’s Empirical Analysis

877 F.2d 469 · 1989

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
2
states following
June 2017
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently June 2017 · most notably 63 Cal. App. 4th 1269 - Edson v. City of Anaheim (1998), Cuesta v. School Board of Miami-Dade County (2002)

11 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

1001989199020002010decided

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))

Relies on Parratt v. Taylor · Tennessee v. Garner · Flagg Brothers Inc v. Brooks J Lefkowitz · Energy Cooperative, Inc. v. Phillips Petroleum Co. · United States v. Dion

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

  1. “Where the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or to others, it is not constitutionally unreasonable to prevent escape by using deadly force. Thus, if the suspect threatens the officer with a weapon or there is probable cause to believe that he has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm, deadly force may be used if necessary to prevent escape, and if, where feasible, some warning has been given.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Thus, unlike the common-law tort of battery, to which self-defense is traditionally an affirmative defense with the burden of justifying the force used falling upon the defendant, Plaintiff here was required to show that Officer Taylor's use of force was unjustified in order to state a constitutional deprivation.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “submits the issues and applicable law to the jury. Miller v. Taylor, 877 F.2d 469 , 471 (6th Cir.1989).”
    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.