Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 877 F.3d 171 - Sims v. Labowitz

Sims v. Labowitz’s Empirical Analysis

877 F.3d 171 · 2017

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
February 2018
most recently cited

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2255 · 18 U.S.C. § 2256 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Katz v. United States · Anderson v. Creighton · United States v. Leon · Bell v. Wolfish

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

  1. “identify the specific right that the plaintiff asserts was infringed by the challenged conduct. [The court] then engage[s] in a two-step inquiry, asking whether a constitutional violation occurred and whether the right violated was clearly established at the time of the official's conduct. Courts have discretion to take these steps in either order. ... A right is clearly established only if its contours are sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates that right. The unlawfulness of the official's conduct must be apparent in light of pre-existing law. To be clearly established, existing precedent must have placed the statutory or constitutional question beyond debate.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “Because inquiry into whether particular conduct qualifies as lascivious is not straightforward, federal appellate courts required to make this determination often consult [the Dost factors, which w]e likewise conclude ... offer helpful guidance in determining whether conduct is lascivious, within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 2256 (2)(A).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “To overcome the qualified immunity defense at the summary judgment stage, the plaintiff must have shown facts that make out a violation of a constitutional right, and the right at issue must have been clearly established at the time of the defendant's alleged misconduct.”
    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.