Zuchel v. Spinharney’s Empirical Analysis
890 F.2d 273 · 1989
Citation profile
21 federal appellate · 11 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently February 2025 · most notably Slattery v. Rizzo (1991), Martin v. Board of County Commissioners of the County of Pueblo (1990)
21 federal appellate · 11 district · 6 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. · Graham v. Connor · Board of Ed., Island Trees Union Free School Dist. No. 26 v. Pico · Osgood v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance · Constant v. United States
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 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“genuine issues of material fact preclud[ed] a judicial determination of whether [the officer's] conduct was objectively reasonable.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Zuchel v. City of Denver · Olsen“Other testimony and evidence contained in the summary judgment record casts doubt on the objective reasonableness of Spinharney’s use of deadly force. At least one witness estimated Zuchel’s distance from Spinharney to be 10-12 feet at the time the shots were fired. This same witness testified that Zuchel was neither charging Spinharney nor stabbing at him, but instead was shot after Zuchel stopped and was trying to “explain what was going on.” Another witness indicated that Zuchel was clearly not close enough to stab Spinharney. Spinharney’s partner, Officer Rathburn, testified that she could not see any weapon in Zuchel’s hand. One witness claims to have heard Spinharney tell Zuchel to “shut up or you’re going to die.” Other witnesses heard no warning by the officers. At least one witness testified Spinhamey fired the four shots “[a]s fast as he could pull the trigger.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Tenorio v. Pitzer“fashion in shooting and killing a man. Specifically, we affirmed the district court's denial of a police officer's motion for summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity in a § 1983 action involving excessive deadly force. After concluding that the victim's right to be free from excessive force was a clearly established right, like the Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable seizures, we held that summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity was improper because, viewing the facts in the light most favorable to the non-moving party,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Olsen
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.