Tanner v. Heise’s Empirical Analysis
879 F.2d 572 · 1989
Citation profile
45 federal appellate · 9 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 72 later decisions — most recently February 2017 · most notably Alexis v. McDonald's Restaurants of Massachusetts, Inc. (1995), Lucas v. Department of Corrections (1995)
45 federal appellate · 9 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))
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Conley v. Gibson · Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Harlow v. Fitzgerald
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.
“A motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim should not be granted unless it appears to a certainty that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claims that would entitle him to relief.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“mere compliance with the procedural requisites of state law would not shield [officers] from liability under § 1983”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“The district court erred in its characterization of Supreme , Court precedent. The portion of the [City of Oklahoma City v.] Tuttle [ 471 U.S. 808 , 105 S.Ct. 2427 , 85 L.Ed.2d 791 ] opinion from which the district court concluded that the Supreme Court had “made clear” that a single incident of unconstitutional activity is not sufficient to impose liability under section 1983 unless proof of that incident demonstrates that it was caused by an underlying unconstitutional policy was joined only by a plurality of the Justices_ In a subsequent case ... the Court was unable to achieve a majority position either approving or disapproving this language.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.